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

General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. City of Wellington

This case concerns a temporary injunction sought by General Telephone Company of the Southwest against the City of Wellington to prevent the enforcement of a telephone rate ordinance (No. 333) and a penalty ordinance (No. 332). The telephone company argued that the rates set by the city were confiscatory, yielding less than a 2% return. Both the trial court and the Amarillo Court of Civil Appeals denied the injunction. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that a return of less than 2% was unreasonable, and that the lower courts erred in their interpretation of the 'status quo' and the requirement for separating urban and suburban operations for rate-making purposes. The court concluded that the telephone company had demonstrated a reasonable probability of success on final hearing, irreparable loss, and adequate protection for customers through a bond.

Telephone Rate DisputeTemporary InjunctionConfiscatory RatesPublic Utility RegulationRate of ReturnConstitutional GuaranteesDue ProcessProperty RightsJudicial ReviewDiscretionary Authority
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 1956

General Telephone Co. v. City of Wellington

This case concerns a temporary injunction in a telephone rate dispute under Art. 1119, Vernon’s Texas Civ. Stats. General Telephone Company of the Southwest sought to prevent the City of Wellington from enforcing rate ordinance No. 333, which fixed local telephone charges, and penalty ordinance No. 332. The petitioner argued the rates were confiscatory, yielding less than a 2% return on property value. Both the trial court and the Amarillo Court of Civil Appeals denied the temporary injunction, citing no abuse of discretion, a small net return, and the lack of rate separation between urban and rural areas. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that a return of less than 2% is unreasonable and that a single community exchange operation is a proper unit for rate-making purposes, thus making the injunction refusal an erroneous application of law to undisputed facts.

Rate DisputeTemporary InjunctionTelephone Utility RegulationConfiscatory RatesFair Return on InvestmentPublic Utility LawCity OrdinancesJudicial Review of RatesSingle Exchange OperationConstitutional Guarantees
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Boyce Iron Works, Inc.

Boyce Iron Works sued Southwestern Bell Telephone and others for property damages resulting from a fire that occurred during a burglary. The fire started after a silent burglar alarm system, connected via a telephone line provided by Southwestern Bell, malfunctioned. Boyce alleged negligence and violations of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. A jury initially found in favor of Boyce, awarding significant damages. However, the appellate court reversed the judgment, holding that Boyce failed to obtain a finding that a defect in the telephone equipment caused the alarm malfunction, and that there was no evidence that Southwestern Bell's alleged misrepresentations or course of conduct were a 'producing cause' of Boyce’s damages. The court rendered judgment that Boyce take nothing from Southwestern Bell.

Property DamageBurglar Alarm SystemNegligenceDeceptive Trade Practices ActProducing CauseAppellate ReviewBurden of ProofSpecial IssuesJury FindingsReversed Judgment
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 22, 1977

Falcon v. General Telephone Co.

Mariano S. Falcon, a Mexican-American, filed a class-action lawsuit against General Telephone on April 3, 1975, alleging discrimination in hiring and promotion. The court found that Falcon himself was discriminated against in promotions but not in hiring. For the class, General Telephone discriminated in hiring but not in promotions. The relief granted includes awards for backpay, overtime pay, loss of job security, and six percent interest. The court denied monetary relief for shift differential pay, potential promotions, and "individual initiative" as too speculative. Damages were granted up to the end of "phase I" of the trial, and attorney fees were awarded to the plaintiffs.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VIIClass ActionRacial DiscriminationMexican-AmericanBackpayPromotionsHiring PracticesBurden of ProofAttorney Fees
References
3
Case No. 2014-08-0020
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2015

Weiland, Michael v. Fedex Express Co.

Michael Weiland, a pilot for Fedex Express Co., filed a Request for Expedited Hearing after contracting an illness, believed to be "swine flu" or "bird flu," during a trip to China. He sought medical and temporary disability benefits from Fedex, claiming the illness arose out of and in the course and scope of his employment due to exposure risks in third-world countries. The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims, presided over by Judge Jim Umsted, conducted telephonic hearings on January 15 and 22, 2015. The Court denied Mr. Weiland's request for benefits, finding that he failed to establish by expert medical evidence a causal connection between his illness and his employment. This order is not a Final Order.

InfluenzaOccupational DiseaseCausal ConnectionMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityExpedited HearingEmployment ScopePilotInternational Travel ExposureWorkers' Compensation Denial
References
11
Case No. 2014-05-002
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 2014

Hosford, Jane v. Red Rover Preschool

Jane Hosford, an employee of Red Rover Preschool, filed a request for an expedited hearing after sustaining a right knee injury at work on July 7, 2014, when she slipped while removing cots. The employer disputed the claim, questioning the timing of the injury, the employer's responsibility, and the timeliness of the notice. A telephonic hearing was held on September 10, 2014, where the Court found the Employee's testimony credible, determining that the injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment. The Court also established Red Rover Preschool as the proper party based on a sales agreement and confirmed that timely notice was given by the employee. Consequently, the Court ordered the Employer to provide medical care, including a panel of physicians, and to cover all past and future reasonable and necessary medical expenses related to the employee's knee injury. The decision can be appealed to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board within seven business days.

Workers' CompensationKnee InjuryMedical BenefitsExpedited HearingTimely NoticeEmployer ResponsibilityCredibility AssessmentTelephonic TestimonyCausationPreponderance of Evidence
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Etex Telephone Cooperative, Inc. v. Sanders

H. B. Sanders sued Etex Telephone Cooperative, Inc. for trespass, alleging damages from an unauthorized burial of a telephone cable on his property in Marion County. Etex brought in Hutton Construction Company, Inc. and Fanning Engineers, Inc. as third-party defendants, claiming indemnity or contribution for contract non-compliance. Sanders subsequently added Hutton and Fanning as direct defendants. A jury found Etex and Fanning jointly and severally liable for actual damages of $11,900.00 and Etex solely liable for $10,000.00 in exemplary damages. Etex appealed, contesting the damages, the jury's findings, and the denial of indemnity from the third-party defendants. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the damage awards and rejecting Etex's arguments regarding the measure of damages, Sanders' alleged obstruction of cable removal, and claims for indemnity or contribution.

TrespassReal Property DamagesExemplary DamagesProperty EasementUtility CableContract DisputeJury InstructionsAppellate ReviewJoint and Several LiabilityIndemnity Claims
References
17
Case No. ADJ1941485 (VNO 0263845) ADJ4137418 (VNO 0270976) ADJ1018222 (MON 0140131)
Regular
Dec 15, 2008

GERTRUDE CHISM vs. K-MART/SEARS HOLDING CORPORATION, Permissibly Self-Insured Administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's petition to remove WCJ Zarett as moot due to his retirement, and denied the request for a commissioner's hearing on sanctions as premature. The Board remanded the case to the trial level for a full evidentiary hearing on the defendant's allegations regarding the applicant's attorneys, as these factual issues are best addressed by a new Workers' Compensation Judge. The defendant's numerous petitions for removal, vacating hearings, and stays were largely dismissed or denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGertrude ChismK-Mart/Sears Holding CorporationSedgwick Claims Management ServicesPetition for Commissioner's HearingRemoval of Judge ZarettVacate HearingStay ProceedingsImposition of SanctionsGuardian Ad Litem
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bahr v. New York Telephone Co.

This case involves a complaint initiated by Ricky Carnivale, later substituted by Morton Bahr, on behalf of the Communication Workers of America, against the New York Telephone Company. The complainant alleged a violation of Section 900-2.0 (subd. c) of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, pertaining to the transportation of individuals to replace striking employees. The court meticulously analyzed the definitions within the Administrative Code, particularly focusing on what constitutes a 'strikebreaker' and the involvement of parties 'not directly involved in a strike.' The judge concluded that the New York Telephone Company was directly involved in the strike, rendering certain provisions inapplicable. Crucially, the court found a lack of evidence that the individuals brought in met the statutory definition of 'strikebreakers' who 'customarily and repeatedly' offer themselves for employment during a strike. Therefore, the court ruled that a complaint should not be issued against the defendant.

StrikeLabor DisputeStrikebreakersAdministrative CodeNew York City LawUnion RightsEmployer RightsComplaint DenialIndustrial RelationsSubstitute Complainant
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 04, 1985

Guilmette v. New York Telephone Co.

Plaintiff, a former telephone operator for New York Telephone Company, was dismissed for excessive absences and subsequently sought disability pay and a deferred vested pension. The court found that she was ineligible for both benefit plans. Her disability, a 20% binaural hearing loss, did not constitute a total disability, as evidenced by her receipt of workers' compensation benefits, which requires an ability to work. Furthermore, she had only 14 years and 6 months of service credit, falling short of the 15 years required for both disability and pension benefits. The plaintiff's opposition to summary judgment, based solely on an attorney's conclusory affirmation, was deemed insufficient, leading to the reversal of the lower court's decision, the granting of the defendant's motion, and the dismissal of the complaint.

Summary JudgmentDisability BenefitsPension BenefitsExcessive AbsencesService CreditHearing LossWorkers' Compensation BenefitsAppellate ReviewCPLR 3212Attorney Affirmation
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 4,407 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