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. E2013-02797-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2014

Roadway Express, Inc. v. Sammy T. Robertson

This case involves an appeal by Roadway Express, Inc. against Sammy T. Robertson regarding a workers' compensation claim. Roadway had previously been ordered by the Circuit Court for Bradley County to pay for Robertson's medical treatment. This order was later vacated by the Tennessee Supreme Court Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel due to the trial court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as administrative remedies were not exhausted. Roadway then sought reimbursement from Robertson, but the Trial Court dismissed the suit, again citing lack of subject matter jurisdiction under workers' compensation laws. The Court of Appeals reversed this dismissal, holding that the Trial Court did have subject matter jurisdiction for Roadway's reimbursement claim, as it was a common law action for funds paid under an invalid order, not a workers' compensation claim. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationSubject Matter JurisdictionReimbursementAppellate ReviewMotion to DismissInvalid OrderExhaustion of Administrative RemediesCommon Law ActionTennessee Court of AppealsTrial Court Reversal
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mosher v. St. Joseph's Villa

Dennis B. Mosher was injured when he fell from a ladder while clearing land for the construction of a parking lot and building owned by St. Joseph’s Villa. He and his wife filed an action against St. Joseph’s Villa and Seneca Roadways, Inc., alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240, and 241. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the Labor Law § 240 (1) cause of action against both defendants and the negligence cause of action against St. Joseph’s Villa. On appeal, the order was modified. The Appellate Court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against St. Joseph’s Villa, determining that tree removal was incidental to construction. However, the dismissal of the common-law negligence claim against St. Joseph’s Villa and the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim against Seneca Roadways was affirmed, as St. Joseph’s Villa did not supervise the work and Seneca Roadways was not an owner or responsible contractor.

Ladder FallSite PreparationConstruction AccidentSummary JudgmentLabor Law § 240(1)Owner LiabilityContractor LiabilityCommon-Law NegligenceAppellate ReviewPremises Liability
References
10
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 08814 [134 AD3d 685]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 02, 2015

Maggio v. Town of Hempstead

The plaintiff, Vincenzo Maggio, sought damages for personal injuries after allegedly tripping on a roadway defect. He filed an action against the Town of Hempstead, which subsequently moved for summary judgment, asserting it lacked prior written notice of the defect and did not create the hazardous condition. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, denied the Town's motion. However, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed this decision, finding that the Town successfully demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The Appellate Division concluded that the plaintiff failed to present a triable issue of fact to counter the Town's claims, specifically regarding the creation of the defect, deeming the opposing affidavits speculative.

Personal injuryTrip and fallRoadway defectPrior written noticeSummary judgmentMunicipal liabilityAffirmative negligenceSpecial use doctrineAppellate reviewNassau County
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2010

Foley v. Consolidated Edison Co.

Plaintiff sustained burn injuries while excavating a trench for his employer, Roadway, a subcontractor for Con Edison, when a hand-held saw manufactured by John Deere caught fire. The Supreme Court granted Con Edison's motion for summary judgment, finding it did not control the method of plaintiff's work and only exercised general supervisory powers. The court also dismissed the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim against Con Edison due to the plaintiff's failure to plead specific Industrial Code violations and subsequent abandonment of the theory. Roadway's motion for summary judgment dismissing John Deere's third-party action was granted, as John Deere had no contractual indemnification claim against Roadway, and plaintiff's injuries were not 'grave' under Workers' Compensation Law § 11. Finally, the court denied John Deere's motion for spoliation sanctions regarding the lost saw, allowing an adverse inference charge at trial instead, citing no unfair advantage or prejudice to John Deere's design defect claims.

Summary JudgmentSpoliation of EvidenceLabor LawWorkers' Compensation LawIndustrial Code ViolationsThird-Party ActionProduct LiabilityPersonal InjuryBurn InjuriesSubcontractor Liability
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Marceca v. City of New York

Rosaría Marceca sued the City of New York for injuries sustained on September 15, 2000, when she tripped on a roadway defect. She later sought to add Keyspan Corporation as a defendant, which was granted in November 2003. Keyspan moved to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. The court granted Keyspan's motion to dismiss, ruling the claims were time-barred as the motion to amend was filed after the three-year statute of limitations expired. The City of New York also moved for summary judgment, arguing lack of prior written notice of the defect. The court granted the City's motion, finding Marceca failed to provide evidence of prior written notice, a condition precedent for such an action.

NegligenceStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentSidewalk DefectPrior Written NoticeMunicipal LiabilityCPLRAdministrative CodeTolling of LimitationsRelation Back Doctrine
References
27
Case No. 14-09-00244-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 15, 2010

Texas Department of Transportation v. Olivares

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) appealed the trial court's denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in a wrongful death lawsuit. Appellees Zuleima and Pedro Olivares brought claims after Pedro Olivares, Jr. was killed by an intoxicated wrong-way driver on the Westpark Tollway. The claims against TxDOT included premise defects related to traffic control devices and roadway design, as well as a joint-enterprise theory of liability. The Court of Appeals partially affirmed the trial court's denial for some joint-enterprise claims, reversed and rendered dismissal for other joint-enterprise claims, and reversed and remanded several premise defect claims to allow appellees an opportunity to amend their pleadings to establish jurisdiction.

Sovereign ImmunityGovernmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActPlea to the JurisdictionPremise DefectNegligent ImplementationTraffic Control DevicesRoadway DesignJoint EnterpriseWrongful Death
References
67
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 07503
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 15, 2020

Martin v. City of New York

Nicholas Martin sued the City of New York after sustaining personal injuries from a fall on a roadway in the Bronx, alleging the City's negligent repair work created the hazardous condition. The City moved for summary judgment, arguing it did not receive prior written notice of the defect as required by the Pothole Law. Martin contended that prior written notice was not necessary because the City's affirmative act of negligence caused the defect. The Appellate Division, First Department, found that there were triable issues of fact regarding whether the City's repair work immediately created the dangerous condition. Consequently, the court reversed the Supreme Court's decision granting summary judgment to the City and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Personal InjuryRoadway DefectMunicipal LiabilityPrior Written NoticeAffirmative NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewBronx CountySlip and FallCity of New York
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Stevenson v. Yellow Roadway Corp.

A tractor trailer operator employed by Yellow Roadway Corporation crashed and suffered a massive stroke, dying two days later. His widow filed a claim for workers’ compensation death benefits, which the employer attempted to controvert. The Workers’ Compensation Board determined the employer failed to timely controvert the claim, thereby barring their defenses regarding causation. Relying on the presumption of compensability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1), the Board established a causally related death. The employer appealed, challenging the application of the presumption and the finding of a causally related death. The appellate court affirmed the Board’s decision, upholding that the employer was precluded from raising defenses due to the untimely filing of the notice of controversy.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsCausal RelationPresumption of CompensabilityWorkers’ Compensation Law § 21Workers’ Compensation Law § 25Untimely ControversionStrokeAppellate ReviewEmployer Liability
References
9
Case No. SBR 0280470 SBR 0327724
Regular
Aug 07, 2007

WILBUR L. RYAN vs. ROADWAY EXPRESS, INC., Permissibly Self-Insured

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the WCJ's decisions in two cases involving applicant Wilbur L. Ryan and defendant Roadway Express, Inc. The Board found that the WCJ's findings lacked substantial medical evidence regarding the cumulative trauma to the applicant's right knee and whether the prior specific injury and subsequent cumulative trauma became permanent and stationary at the same time. The matters are returned to the trial level for further proceedings to develop the record.

Petition to ReopenStipulated AwardCumulative TraumaRight Knee InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentWilkinson DoctrinePermanent and Stationary DateMedical EvidenceQualified Medical Examiner
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Boots v. Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.

Peter and Cindy Boots filed a products liability action against Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., alleging injury to Peter Boots from a defective utility knife. Defendant moved for summary judgment, asserting no manufacturing defect, no design defect as the proximate cause, substantial modification of the product, and that Plaintiff's own negligence was the sole proximate cause. The court denied the motion for summary judgment on the manufacturing defect claim, finding the plaintiff's expert report admissible. It also denied summary judgment on the design defect claim due to misleading design, and rejected the substantial modification argument. Finally, the court denied the proximate cause argument, as it was not established that Plaintiff's actions were the *sole* cause of injury.

Products LiabilitySummary JudgmentManufacturing DefectDesign DefectProximate CauseExpert WitnessUtility KnifeStrict LiabilityProduct SafetyFederal Civil Procedure
References
38
Showing 1-10 of 1,341 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