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. 14-19-00178-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 11, 2021

United Locating Services, LLC v. Damon Fobbs, Rodney Johnson, & Carlos Harrell

United Locating Services, LLC appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) in a lawsuit brought by former employees Damon Fobbs, Rodney Johnson, and Carlos Harrell. The former employees sued United for defamation and invasion of privacy, alleging that United continued to use their names on work orders and damage tickets after their employment. The appellate court determined that the former employees' claims fell within the TCPA's scope. However, the court found that the former employees failed to establish by clear and specific evidence a prima facie case for each essential element of their claims, specifically regarding the 'value associated with their names' for the appropriation claims and 'publication' and 'actual malice or negligence' for the defamation claims. The trial court's order denying the motion to dismiss was reversed, and the case was remanded for a determination of attorney's fees, court costs, and sanctions to be awarded to United.

Texas Citizens Participation ActTCPADefamationInvasion of PrivacyName AppropriationMotion to DismissAppellate ReviewEmployment LitigationFree Speech RightsRight of Association
References
11
Case No. ADJ7735518 ADJ7735519 ADJ7735513 ADJ7735501 ADJ7735502 ADJ7736429 ADJ7736449 ADJ7735498 ADJ7098593 ADJ7735514
Regular
Jul 29, 2014

Marialaine Tabak vs. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration regarding a dispute over medical treatment authorization. The core issue was whether a Medical Provider Network (MPN) could restrict treatment to specific office locations of a listed physician. The Board affirmed the WCJ's finding that the defendant school district properly denied authorization for treatment at an unauthorized location of an MPN physician. The MPN's explicit listing stated providers were in-network only at designated locations, and this contractual limitation was upheld. Therefore, treatment outside the approved location was at the applicant's own expense.

Medical Provider NetworkMPNPhysician locationAuthorizationSelf-procureGeographic limitExclusive rightContractual limitationsEmployer's obligationAdministrative Director's Rule
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2016

Pace v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp.

Raymond Balcerzak, an electrician, developed lung cancer and passed away, allegedly due to asbestos exposure during his nearly 50-year career. His lawsuit against various manufacturers, alleging product liability for his injuries, was removed to federal court. Several defendants moved for summary judgment, contending a lack of evidence connecting their specific products to Balcerzak's asbestos exposure. The Court granted summary judgment for Buffalo, Gardner Denver, Byron Jackson, Warren, and Square D, finding insufficient product identification or specific timing/location of exposure. However, the motion for summary judgment by Allen-Bradley was denied, as genuine issues of material fact remained regarding Balcerzak's exposure to asbestos from their arc chutes and contactor insulation.

Asbestos ExposureLung CancerWrongful DeathProducts LiabilitySummary JudgmentFederal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a)Circumstantial EvidenceProduct IdentificationMaritime LawNew York Law
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Eichenholtz v. Brennan

Paulette Eichenholtz initiated a class action alleging violations of federal securities laws and a shareholder derivative action against International Thoroughbred Breeders, Inc. (ITB) and other defendants. The claims stem from ITB's investment in the Garden State Race Track in New Jersey, with allegations of misstatements and omissions in ITB's securities offerings. Defendants moved to dismiss or, alternatively, transfer the case to the District of New Jersey. The court, after considering factors such as where operative facts occurred, the location of witnesses and documents, convenience of the parties, plaintiff's choice of forum, and docket conditions, concluded that the case had substantial connections to New Jersey. The plaintiff, a New Jersey resident, brought an action primarily concerning New Jersey transactions, and most defendants and crucial evidence are located there. The court granted the defendants' motion, transferring the case to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, specifically the Camden vicinage.

securities fraudshareholder derivative suitRICO Actvenue transferforum non conveniensinterstate commercecorporate misconductNew Jersey lawDelaware corporationfinancial losses
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Guzelgurgenli v. Prime Time Specials Inc.

Plaintiffs Cemil Gurkan Guzelgurgenli, Hasan Kasikci, and Bilal Habes Kasikci filed a collective action suit against Prime Time Specials Inc. and Christopher Hanley for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York State Labor Law regarding unpaid overtime and spread-of-hours compensation. They moved for conditional certification of a class of employees. The court granted conditional certification for delivery drivers, in-store hourly employees, and assistant store managers at six specific Domino's locations (Holbrook, Coram, Sayville, Patchogue, Stony Brook, and Centereach), finding a 'modest factual showing' of a common illegal policy. However, certification was denied for 'store managers' and employees at two other disputed locations (Smithtown and Miller Place). The court also set a three-year notice period and a 60-day opt-in period but denied the request for a reminder notice.

FLSANY Labor LawConditional CertificationCollective ActionOvertime CompensationUnpaid WagesAssistant ManagersDelivery DriversHourly EmployeesWage and Hour Dispute
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 29, 1975

Brewery Workers Pension Fund v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund

In an action for a declaratory judgment and for specific performance of a certain agreement, defendants appeal from a judgment and order (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 29, 1975, which, *inter alia,* granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Judgment and order affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. There are no issues requiring a trial.

Declaratory JudgmentSpecific PerformanceSummary JudgmentAppealAffirmedQueens CountySupreme CourtContract LawJudgment and OrderAppellate Division
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Specific Software Solutions, LLC v. Institute of Workcomp Advisors, LLC

Specific Software Solutions, a Tennessee LLC, filed a declaratory judgment action against the Institute of WorkComp Advisors, a North Carolina LLC, seeking a declaration of non-infringement of copyrights. This suit was initiated after the Institute sent a cease-and-desist letter alleging copyright infringement, despite its copyright applications not yet being registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. The Institute moved to dismiss, arguing the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because federal law requires copyright registration as a prerequisite for filing an infringement suit. The court, adopting the "registration" approach, determined that merely filing an application is insufficient for registration; the Copyright Office must first review and decide on the copyrightability of the material. Consequently, finding that the Institute's copyrights were not yet registered, the court granted the motion to dismiss the case without prejudice due to a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Copyright LawSubject Matter JurisdictionMotion to DismissDeclaratory JudgmentCopyright RegistrationSixth CircuitIntellectual PropertyFederal CourtsStatutory InterpretationPleading
References
21
Case No. ADJ2203540
Regular
Jan 11, 2012

GORDON ANTHONY vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the Applicant, Gordon Anthony. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to correct a clerical error in the original decision dated October 18, 2011. Specifically, the Board amended the decision to change the applicant's name from "ANTHONY GORDON" to "GORDON ANTHONY" in multiple locations of the findings and order. Otherwise, the Board affirmed the original decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationClerical ErrorFindings of FactOrderOpinion on DecisionApplicantDefendantSelf-InsuredAmended Decision
References
0
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 04322 [240 AD3d 1230]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 25, 2025

Skrzynski v. Akebono Brake Corp.

Joseph A. Skrzynski sued Akebono Brake Corporation and Ford Motor Company for personal injuries, specifically mesothelioma, resulting from asbestos exposure from friction products while working at an automobile dealership. The jury found Ford Motor Company liable for failing to warn about the asbestos hazards. On appeal, Ford challenged the legal sufficiency of the evidence for both general and specific causation. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirmed the judgment, concluding that the trial evidence was legally sufficient to establish both that chrysotile asbestos from automotive brakes can cause peritoneal mesothelioma (general causation) and that plaintiff's exposure levels were sufficient to cause his illness (specific causation). A dissenting justice argued that plaintiff's experts offered insufficient evidence for both general and specific causation, particularly regarding the specific type of asbestos and the quantification of plaintiff's exposure.

Products LiabilityAsbestos ExposureMesotheliomaFailure to WarnCausationGeneral CausationSpecific CausationAppellate ReviewJury VerdictExpert Testimony
References
16
Case No. ADJ6586259
Regular
May 17, 2010

Ramon Navarro vs. Landscape Specialists, Inc./Artistic Maintenance Landscaping, Inc., IWC Group

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration of a decision that found he did not prove a work-related injury. The applicant's testimony regarding the time, location, and manner of his alleged injury was inconsistent and contradicted by his phone records and the credible testimony of a defense witness. The Administrative Law Judge found the applicant not credible, and the Board affirmed this finding, stating the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. The Board specifically gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationCredibilityGeneral LaborerGardenerBack InjuryLeft Lower Extremity InjurySleep DisorderSexual DysfunctionImpeachment
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 6,068 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