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. 13-99-271-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2002

West, Randy and Antonia West v. Maintenance Tool and Supply Co., Inc. and Rene Rodriguez, Individually and as Representative of Maintenance Tool and Supply Co., Inc.

The appellants, Randy and Antonia West, appealed a default summary judgment granted in favor of appellees, Maintenance Tool & Supply Co., Inc. and Rene Rodriguez. The claims at issue were workers' compensation retaliation and defamation, along with sanctions imposed against West's counsel. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment on the retaliation claim, finding that Maintenance Tool & Supply Co. established a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for West's termination and that West had adequate notice of the hearing. The defamation claim was also affirmed for summary judgment due to judicial proceeding privilege. However, the court reversed the order imposing sanctions, ruling that the trial court abused its discretion by not providing notice and an evidentiary hearing as required by procedural rules before imposing sanctions.

Summary judgmentWorkers' compensation retaliationDefamationRule 13 sanctionsAbuse of discretionNotice of hearingMotion for new trialCausation employment lawJudicial proceeding privilegeAttorney conduct
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Baggett v. Bedford County

A prisoner, Charles Robert Baggett, sustained serious injuries at the Bedford County jail while voluntarily participating in a workhouse program. He fell from a defective scaffold that was insufficient for the assigned task, requiring him to dangerously place a ladder on top. Baggett sued the county under the Governmental Tort Liability Act, but the trial court granted summary judgment based on the simple tool doctrine and comparative negligence. The appellate court reversed, ruling that the simple tool doctrine, a form of implied assumption of risk, has been abolished in Tennessee. The court also found that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the parties' comparative fault, making summary judgment inappropriate.

Comparative NegligenceSimple Tool DoctrineAssumption of RiskGovernmental Tort Liability ActPrisoner InjuryScaffold CollapseWorkhouse ProgramDefective EquipmentSummary Judgment ReversalTennessee Law
References
14
Case No. 2-05-154-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 23, 2006

Woodrow S. Peery v. Stanley Mechanic Tools, Inc. A/K/A Stanley Mechanics Tools A/K/A the Stanley Works

This is an appeal in a workers' compensation employment retaliation case. Appellant Woodrow S. Peery challenged the trial court's order in favor of appellee Stanley Mechanic Tools, Inc. Peery contended that three veniremembers were biased and that the trial court erred in denying challenges for cause. The appellate court found that Peery did not properly preserve error because he failed to peremptorily strike two objectionable veniremembers and did not timely notify the trial court before the jury was empaneled. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

workers' compensationemployment retaliationjury selectionchallenges for causeveniremembersjury biaspreservation of errorappellate procedureTexas civil procedurememorandum opinion
References
3
Case No. 08-19-00087-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 04, 2019

El Paso Tool & Die Co., Inc. v. Carlos Mendez

El Paso Tool and Die Company, Inc. (Appellant) sought a permissive appeal after its motion for summary judgment was denied. Carlos Mendez (Appellee), a temporary laborer from Elwood Staffing, sued El Paso Tool for negligence after losing fingers in an industrial accident. El Paso Tool asserted an exclusive remedy defense under the Texas Labor Code, claiming Mendez was their employee. The trial court denied the motion, finding Mendez was an independent contractor. The appellate court dismissed the permissive appeal, concluding it was improvidently granted due to the trial court's unclear application of legal standards and the presence of disputed facts regarding the control over Mendez's work details.

Workers' CompensationExclusive Remedy DefenseSummary Judgment DenialPermissive AppealTemporary Staffing AgencyBorrowed Servant DoctrineIndependent ContractorRight of ControlIndustrial AccidentNegligence Claims
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Reed Tool Co. v. Copelin

Mrs. Judy Copelin sued Reed Tool Company for loss of consortium following her husband's severe brain injury sustained on the job, alleging the employer intentionally caused the harm by maintaining an unsafe workplace. The central legal issue was whether an employer's intentional creation of a hazardous work environment constitutes an intentional injury, thereby allowing an employee to bypass the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act. The trial court initially granted summary judgment for Reed Tool, a decision later reversed by the court of appeals. This Supreme Court ultimately reversed the court of appeals, reinstating the trial court's summary judgment. The Court ruled that merely failing to provide a safe workplace does not qualify as an intentional injury unless the employer specifically believed the injury was substantially certain to occur, a standard the plaintiff's evidence of gross negligence failed to meet.

Employer LiabilityIntentional InjuryUnsafe WorkplaceLoss of Consortium ClaimSummary Judgment ReviewWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityGross Negligence DistinctionSubstantially Certain InjuryWorkers' Compensation Act (Texas)Tort Law
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 19, 1994

Comer v. Titan Tool, Inc.

Plaintiffs Delores Comer and Patricia Edelson, as personal representatives of Michael Comer's estate, brought a diversity action for wrongful death against Titan Tool, Inc., the manufacturer of a paint sprayer Michael Comer was using when he died. Titan Tool, Inc. then filed a third-party complaint seeking contribution from Rock & Waterscape Systems, Inc. (R&W), Comer's employer. R&W moved for summary judgment, arguing that under Florida workers’ compensation law, a death benefit payment to Delores Comer barred further liability. The court, applying New York's choice of law rules and interest analysis, found no basis for applying Florida law as R&W is a California domiciliary. The court denied R&W's motion for summary judgment, stating that triable issues remained regarding the choice of law question between New York and California, as Florida law could not control the case.

wrongful deathsummary judgmentchoice of lawdiversity jurisdictionworkers' compensationdomicileloss allocationtort lawemployer liabilityproduct liability
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hughes Tool Co. v. Richards

Willie D. Richards, an employee of Hughes Tool Company, sued his former employer for wrongful discharge, alleging he was fired for filing a worker's compensation claim, in violation of Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat. Ann. art. 8307c. A jury found in Richards' favor, awarding $30,000 in damages. Hughes appealed, contending Richards' claim was barred by the final adverse determination from the contractual grievance procedure he pursued with his union. The appellate court agreed with Hughes, ruling that an employee who elects to proceed through a grievance procedure resulting in a final settlement cannot then file a lawsuit under article 8307c, especially when no breach of the union's duty of fair representation is alleged. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the lower court's judgment and rendered a take-nothing judgment for Hughes.

Workers' CompensationWrongful DischargeGrievance ProcedureCollective Bargaining AgreementFinal SettlementUnion RepresentationTexas LawArticle 8307cAppellate ReviewJury Verdict Reversal
References
5
Case No. 2024-50-4684
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2025

Winfrey, Jackey v. McMinnville Tool and Die, Inc.

The employee, Jackey Winfrey, appealed the dismissal of his workers' compensation claim against McMinnville Tool and Die, Inc. Winfrey alleged multiple work-related injuries but exhibited continuous dissatisfaction with authorized physicians, missed appointments, and engaged in inappropriate, profane, and threatening communication with legal and court personnel. He also failed to attend a court-ordered deposition. The trial court initially granted a voluntary dismissal and subsequently dismissed the case with prejudice due to Winfrey's repeated violations of court orders and failure to cooperate in discovery. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, finding no abuse of discretion given the employee's abusive conduct and persistent non-compliance.

Employee misconductDiscovery violationsMedical treatment refusalHarassmentAbusive languageDismissal with prejudiceWorkers' compensation appealPro se litigantSanctionsAppeals board decision
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Khan v. Douglas MacHine & Tool Co., Inc.

Subhan Khan sued Douglas Machine & Tool Company, Inc. and TurboCombustor Technology, Inc. for failure to pay sums due under a debenture. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Khan violated a Subordination Agreement by attempting to collect on a junior debt without the senior creditor's consent. Khan cross-moved for summary judgment, asserting the Subordination Agreement was invalidly assigned or that the senior debt had been paid. The court found the Subordination Agreement validly assigned and in force, and that Khan failed to provide sufficient admissible evidence that the senior debt was extinguished. Consequently, the court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed Khan's action, while denying Khan's cross-motion.

Summary JudgmentDebentureSubordination AgreementContract LawAssignment of ContractCorporate Veil PiercingOhio LawNew York LawDiversity JurisdictionFederal Rules of Civil Procedure
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

West v. MAINTENANCE TOOL & SUPPLY CO., INC.

Randy and Antonia West appealed a default summary judgment granted to Maintenance Tool & Supply Company, Inc. and Rene Rodriguez (MT) on claims of workers' compensation retaliation and defamation. The trial court also imposed $21,095.00 in sanctions against West's counsel. The appellate court addressed issues regarding notice of the summary judgment hearing, denial of a new trial, the merits of the summary judgment on retaliation and defamation claims, and the sanctions order. The court affirmed the summary judgment on the retaliation and defamation claims, finding West had sufficient notice and failed to establish a causal link for retaliation or overcome the judicial privilege for defamation. However, the appellate court reversed the sanctions order against West's counsel due to the lack of an evidentiary hearing and failure to establish bad faith or harassment.

Summary JudgmentDefault JudgmentWorkers' Compensation RetaliationDefamationRule 13 SanctionsMotion for New TrialAdequate NoticeCausationJudicial Proceeding PrivilegeAbuse of Discretion
References
43
Showing 1-10 of 1,157 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