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

Claim of Bashwinger v. Cath-Fran Construction Co.

A construction laborer sustained quadriplegic injuries after hitting his head in a pool while at a private residence, mistakenly believing he was there for work-related activities. He filed a workers' compensation claim, which the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and subsequent Board panels deemed compensable. The employer appealed these decisions. The court, without addressing the timeliness of the claim, reversed the Board's findings. It ruled that the claimant's injuries did not arise out of and in the course of employment, categorizing the activity as a personal pursuit and dismissing the claim.

Compensability of InjuryCourse of EmploymentPersonal Pursuit ExceptionRecreational ActivityQuadriplegic InjuryEmployer ResponsibilityWorkers' Compensation Board AppealDecision ReversalAppellate Court RulingLabor Law Interpretation
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Grady v. Dun & Bradstreet

Claimant, an audit manager for Dun & Bradstreet, was attending a training seminar in New York when, after consuming alcohol, he attempted to swim in a closed and partially drained hotel outdoor pool. He scaled a four-foot fence and dove in, breaking his neck and becoming a quadriplegic. The Workers’ Compensation Board disallowed his claim for benefits, ruling that his actions were so unreasonable that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of his employment, despite his intoxication not being the sole cause. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence in the record to support its determination.

Workers' Compensation Law § 10Travel InjuryHotel IncidentAlcohol ConsumptionIntoxication DefenseUnreasonable ActivityScope of EmploymentDeviations from EmploymentWorkers' Compensation Board AppealAppellate Division
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Figueroa v. Perfect Shoulder Co.

A claimant, a factory supervisor, was rendered a quadriplegic when his parked car on a public street was struck from behind while he was waiting to open the factory at the employer-mandated time. His application for workers' compensation benefits was approved by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge and subsequently upheld by the Workers' Compensation Board. The employer and its carrier appealed, arguing the accident occurred away from the workplace and outside work hours. The court affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that the employer's directive to arrive early and wait established a causal nexus between the employment and the injury.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsScope of EmploymentOff-Premises AccidentEmployer MandateWaiting TimePublic StreetQuadriplegic InjuryCausal NexusBoard Decision AppealTimely Arrival
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Holt v. Preload Technology, Inc.

Arnold Holt, a quadriplegic due to a sixty-foot fall while working for Preload Technology, Inc., sued his employer for gross negligence, challenging the constitutionality of the Workers' Compensation Act which bars such suits. Holt argued for the application of the dual capacity doctrine, claiming the employer acted as both employer and architect-engineer. The trial court dismissed the suit, sustaining exceptions based on the Act's exclusive remedy provisions. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, rejecting the dual capacity doctrine and finding no violation of constitutional rights, asserting that any exceptions to the Workers' Compensation Act must be created by the legislature, not the courts.

Workers' CompensationDual Capacity DoctrineEmployer ImmunityConstitutional ChallengeGross NegligenceExclusive RemedyDue ProcessOpen Courts ProvisionTexas LawWorkplace Injury
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Greater Houston Transportation Co. v. Zrubeck

The case involves an appeal by Greater Houston Transportation Company against a judgment finding it grossly negligent. Ernest Zrubeck, a quadriplegic, suffered severe injuries after falling from his wheelchair in a MetroLift van due to inadequate safety measures by the company's driver. The jury awarded Zrubeck actual and exemplary damages. Greater Houston challenged the verdict on multiple grounds, including procedural errors regarding jury polling and concurrence, and the sufficiency of evidence for negligence and damages. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, ruling against Greater Houston on all points and upholding the jury's findings of gross negligence and the awarded damages.

Gross NegligenceExemplary DamagesActual DamagesBifurcated TrialJury VerdictAppellate ReviewTransportation SafetyWheelchair SafetyInadequate TrainingConscious Indifference
References
42
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 1994

Raponi v. Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc.

Petitioner Eugene D. Raponi, a quadriplegic due to a work-related motor vehicle accident, along with his wife Marcia Raponi, settled a personal injury action for $100,000. The respondents, who provided workers' compensation benefits, consented to the settlement but maintained their lien. Petitioners sought to apportion the settlement proceeds, with Marcia Raponi seeking the majority due to her substantial uncompensated care for her husband. The Supreme Court granted the apportionment, finding her services exceeded the settlement value and would have otherwise required significant workers' compensation payments. This decision was affirmed on appeal, stating it prevented a double recovery while acknowledging the wife's significant uncompensated loss.

Settlement ApportionmentLoss of ConsortiumCatastrophic InjuryWorkers' Compensation LienPersonal Injury SettlementSpousal CareEquitable ApportionmentAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionDouble Recovery Prevention
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Access 4 All, Inc. v. Trump International Hotel & Tower Condominium

Plaintiffs Access 4 Al, Inc., a non-profit representing disabled persons, and Peter Spalluto, a quadriplegic using a wheelchair, sued Trump International Hotel and Tower Condominium under Title III of the ADA. They sought a declaratory judgment and an injunction for ADA-mandated alterations, alleging discrimination due to inaccessible facilities during Spalluto's 2004 stay. Defendant moved to dismiss or for summary judgment. The Court found Spalluto demonstrated a plausible intention to return to Trump Tower, establishing his standing. However, the Court dismissed Access 4 Al's claims, finding them identical to Spalluto's and citing prudential limitations on associational standing, while denying the defendant's motion against Spalluto.

Americans with Disabilities ActADAStandingInjunctive ReliefSummary JudgmentMotion to DismissAccessibility GuidelinesADAAGQuadriplegiaWheelchair User
References
53
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cecilia M. Simmons v. Outreach Health Community Care Services, LP. D/B/A Outreach Health Services

Cecilia Simmons, a certified nursing assistant, sued her employer, Outreach Health Community Care Services, for injuries sustained while moving a quadriplegic patient. Simmons alleged a breach of duty to provide a safe work environment. The trial court dismissed her claim with prejudice, deeming it a health care liability claim (HCLC) under the Texas Medical Liability Act (TMLA) that required an expert report, which Simmons failed to provide. On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal, finding Simmons's claim constituted a breach of safety standards HCLC because her injury occurred while rendering health care services to a patient, and her constitutional challenges to the TMLA's expert report requirement were without merit.

Health Care Liability ClaimTexas Medical Liability ActWorkplace SafetyExpert Report RequirementOpen Courts ProvisionDue ProcessCertified Nursing AssistantEmployer LiabilityPatient Transfer InjuryDismissal with Prejudice
References
25
Case No. 704 F.Supp.2d 237
Regular Panel Decision

Saladino v. Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc.

Vito Saladino sustained quadriplegic injuries after being struck by an unsecured baggage tractor hood manufactured by Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc. (S&S) while working for American Airlines (AA). Saladino and his wife sued S&S for failure to warn, and S&S impleaded AA. A jury found S&S 30% and AA 70% at fault, with Saladino's negligence not a proximate cause. This opinion affirms the jury's verdict, denying S&S's and AA's motions for a directed verdict, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and judgment as a matter of law. It also denies subsequent motions for reconsideration, affirming S&S's duty to warn of the latent danger and that Saladino was not a knowledgeable user.

Product LiabilityFailure to WarnNegligenceQuadriplegia InjuryBaggage Tractor AccidentJury VerdictMotions for ReconsiderationProximate CauseKnowledgeable User ExceptionLatent Danger
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2013

Wilborn ex rel. Wilborn v. Martin

Plaintiff Jeremy Wilborn, a quadriplegic, sued Tennessee state officials for alleged discrimination under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act. He argued that the reduction of his TennCare home health benefits after he turned 21 would force his institutionalization, contrary to his medical needs. The court found that Wilborn demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on his claims, as his treating physicians testified to his need for 24/7 home care and the dangers of nursing home placement. Defendants' argument of fundamental alteration due to cost was largely rejected, as Wilborn's proposed home care plan fell within the budget for similarly situated enrollees. Consequently, the court granted a preliminary injunction, ordering the implementation of Wilborn's individualized home care plan.

Americans with Disabilities ActRehabilitation ActMedicaidTennCareHome Health CareNursing HomeDisability DiscriminationPreliminary InjunctionCost NeutralityCHOICES Program
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 19 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