CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'ROURKE v. Smithsonian Institution Press

Kevin O'Rourke filed a copyright infringement action against the Smithsonian Institution Press and The Smithsonian Institution, alleging they infringed his book "Currier and Ives: The Irish in America" by publishing "Currier and Ives: America Imagined." The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, asserting that 28 U.S.C. § 1498(b) grants exclusive jurisdiction over copyright claims against the United States to the Court of Federal Claims. O'Rourke contended that the defendants were independent entities not falling under "the United States" for the statute's purposes. The Court, however, found that "the United States" in Section 1498(b) should be interpreted broadly, encompassing the Smithsonian Institution and its press, referencing previous rulings where the Smithsonian was considered part of the federal government. Consequently, the Court concluded it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, closing the case.

Copyright InfringementSubject Matter JurisdictionFederal Copyright ActCourt of Federal ClaimsSmithsonian InstitutionUnited StatesSovereign ImmunityMotion to Dismiss28 U.S.C. § 1498(b)Tucker Act
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Melnick v. Press

This case involves a diversity action between plaintiffs Geraldine Melnick and Lonnie Sehwimmer, and defendant Cary Press, stemming from the termination of Melnick's and Press's quasi-marital relationship. Plaintiffs sought the partition of several properties, the imposition of a constructive trust on another, and damages for defendant's alleged wrongful conversion of funds. The Court ordered the partition and equal division of proceeds for the properties at 15 Ohio Avenue and Delray Beach, Florida. However, it denied claims for reimbursement of carrying costs, found no evidence of ouster from 15 Ohio, and rejected conversion claims against Press regarding insurance proceeds and home equity line of credit funds. Additionally, the plaintiffs' request for a constructive trust on the 16 Nevada Avenue property was denied, consequently rendering the claim for punitive damages moot.

Partition ActionReal PropertyJoint TenancyTenancy in CommonConstructive TrustUnjust EnrichmentConversion of FundsQuasi-marital RelationshipProperty DisputeEquitable Remedies
References
44
Case No. 09 Civ. 8139
Regular Panel Decision

Lopresti v. Pace Press, Inc.

The plaintiff, Patrick LoPresti, as Trustee of the ALA-Lithographic Industry Pension Plan, brought an action against Pace Press, Inc. and other defendants, seeking to recover withdrawal liability under ERISA. The plaintiff alleged that a principal purpose of the asset sale transaction between Pace Press and DG3 North America, Inc. was to evade or avoid withdrawal liability. Following a non-jury trial, the Court found that the plaintiff failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that evasion of withdrawal liability was a principal purpose of the sale or its structure. The Court concluded that the primary motivation for the sale was to avert Pace Press's bankruptcy and the Principals' personal guaranty liabilities, and that the transaction's structure served legitimate business objectives. Consequently, the Court denied the plaintiff's claim to recover withdrawal liability.

ERISA Withdrawal LiabilityMultiemployer Pension PlanAsset Purchase AgreementEvade or Avoid LiabilityCorporate BankruptcyPersonal GuarantiesSecured CreditorsUnsecured Creditors PoolBusiness ValuationEmployment Agreements
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Honaker v. Kingsport Press, Inc.

This worker's compensation case involves an appeal by Kingsport Press, the employer, concerning a chancellor's order to pay a portion of employee Almeda Honaker's attorney's fees for temporary total disability benefits. Honaker sustained a back injury, and while her worker's compensation claim was initially denied by Kingsport Press, she received benefits under the employer's self-insured accident and sickness program. The chancellor later found the injury compensable, awarded worker's compensation benefits, and credited Kingsport Press for prior payments, but crucially ordered the employer to cover 20% of Honaker's attorney fees. The Supreme Court reversed this specific order, citing T.C.A. § 50-6-226(a), which stipulates that attorney fees are to be paid by the party employing the attorney. Consequently, the award of worker's compensation benefits was affirmed, but the employer's obligation to pay attorney fees was overturned, with costs of appeal assigned to Honaker.

Worker's CompensationAttorney FeesTemporary Total DisabilityAccident and Sickness PlanEmployer LiabilitySelf-Insured PlanStatutory InterpretationChancellor's DecreeAppellate Review
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Verson Allsteel Press Co. v. Carrier Corp. & Carrier Air Conditioning

Verson Allsteel Press Company appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Carrier Corporation and Carrier Air Conditioning Company. The case involves an employee, Steven Paul Gandy, who was injured operating a press brake manufactured by Verson. Gandy received worker's compensation and subsequently sued Verson, securing a judgment. Verson then sought indemnification from Carrier based on terms in the press brake's production order. Carrier argued the indemnification was barred by Texas Civil Statutes due to a lack of an express written agreement. The appellate court found that the indemnity clauses did constitute an express written agreement, thus reversing the summary judgment and remanding the case for trial on the merits.

IndemnificationWorkers' CompensationSummary JudgmentContract LawProduct LiabilityTexas Civil StatutesExpress AgreementReversed and RemandedPress Brake InjuryThird-Party Claim
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hawkins Ex Rel. Hawkins v. D & J Press Co.

This is a product liability action brought by Yvonne Hawkins, on behalf of her injured husband, Dillard N. Hawkins, against D & J Press Company, Inc., the manufacturer of an industrial briquette press. Dillard Hawkins sustained severe injuries, including amputation and brain damage, when his legs were caught in the press while at work on July 23, 1979. The lawsuit was filed on July 16, 1980. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the action was barred by Tennessee's 10-year Products Liability Act (TCA § 29-28-103), which sets a limitation period from the date the product was first purchased for use (June 7, 1966). The Court considered constitutional challenges to the statute and arguments regarding the Workers' Compensation Act, but ultimately found the 10-year limitation valid and applicable. Therefore, the defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted.

Product LiabilityStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentTennessee LawIndustrial AccidentPersonal InjuryManufacturing DefectBriquette PressWorkers' CompensationDue Process
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 1995

In re Ruben R.

This case concerns an appeal by the Law Guardian and the Commissioner of Social Services against a Family Court decision that allowed press access to child abuse and neglect proceedings involving the surviving siblings of Elisa Izquierdo. The appellants argued that public dissemination of sensitive details would cause irreparable harm to the children, whose identities had already been widely publicized. The Appellate Division reversed the Family Court's decision, emphasizing that the potential trauma to the children, supported by psychological evidence, outweighed the press's interest in free access, especially given the prior media disclosures. The court highlighted the importance of safeguarding children's emotional well-being and privacy in such sensitive proceedings.

Child Protective ProceedingsPress AccessCourtroom ClosurePrivacy Rights of ChildrenChildren's Emotional Well-beingFamily Court Act Article 10Appellate ReviewFirst AmendmentJudiciary LawPsychological Harm
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lewis v. State

A prisoner, Clarence Eugene Lewis, working in a prison workshop, suffered a severe hand injury while operating a punch press without safety guards. He filed a claim with the Tennessee Claims Commission, alleging negligence by his supervisors for inadequate training and unsafe equipment. The Claims Commissioner dismissed his claim, finding Mr. Lewis at least 50% responsible for his injuries due to comparative negligence, as he intentionally placed his hand under the press while his foot was on the pedal. This court affirms the Commissioner's decision, agreeing that while the supervisors were negligent in maintaining a safe workplace and providing training, Mr. Lewis's own actions constituted at least 50% of the fault, precluding recovery under Tennessee's comparative fault principles.

Prisoner injuryIndustrial accidentPunch pressNegligence claimComparative faultWorkplace safetyInadequate trainingSafety guardsTennessee Claims CommissionDepartment of Correction
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 24, 2013

McNamara v. Associated Press

Dolores McNamara, a pro se plaintiff, filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against her former employer, The Associated Press, alleging violations of the ADEA, NYSHRL, and FLSA. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the FLSA claims, arguing the plaintiff failed to demonstrate insufficient payment or protected retaliation activities. The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment on the FLSA claims, finding insufficient evidence from the plaintiff. Additionally, the court identified preliminary defects in McNamara's ADEA and NYSHRL claims and provided her thirty days to respond before a sua sponte summary judgment could be entered on those remaining claims.

Employment DiscriminationSummary JudgmentFLSA ClaimsADEA ClaimsNYSHRL ClaimsRetaliationUnpaid WagesPro Se LitigationFederal Civil ProcedureNew York Law
References
58
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 1978

Memphis Publishing Co. v. Nichols

Ruth Ann Nichols and Bobby Lee Nichols sued Memphis Press-Scimitar for defamation and invasion of privacy after an article falsely implied Mrs. Nichols had an adulterous affair, leading to a shooting. The trial court directed a verdict for the newspaper, but the Court of Appeals reversed, applying an ordinary care standard and eliminating the need for special damages for imputed adultery. The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the reversal, adopting the ordinary negligence standard for private individuals in defamation cases against media defendants. It also abolished the common-law per se/per quod distinction for damages and remanded Mrs. Nichols' libel suit for a new trial, while dismissing Mr. Nichols' libel claim and both invasion of privacy actions.

DefamationLibelInvasion of PrivacyFirst AmendmentFreedom of the PressActual MaliceNegligence StandardPrivate FigurePublic FigurePresumed Damages
References
47
Showing 1-10 of 107 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational