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

Bernhardt v. Tradition North America

Donald Bernhardt sued his former employers, Tradition North America Inc. and Tradition Asiel Securities, Inc., alleging breach of an implied employment contract. Bernhardt claimed he was wrongfully terminated after exposing illegal securities schemes and reporting them to the SEC, violating an implied agreement that the firm would operate lawfully. Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) and sought Rule 11 sanctions against Bernhardt's attorney. The court granted the motion to dismiss, ruling that Bernhardt failed to state a plausible claim for breach of an implied contract under New York's at-will employment doctrine. However, the court denied the request for Rule 11 sanctions, finding the lawsuit, while unsuccessful, did not constitute sanctionable conduct.

Implied contractEmployment at willWrongful terminationWhistleblowerSecurities law violationsMotion to dismissRule 12(b)(6)Rule 11 sanctionsFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureNew York employment law
References
18
Case No. M2012-01040-SC-R11-JV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 18, 2014

In Re Baby

A woman (Surrogate J.J.E.) entered into a traditional surrogacy contract with intended parents (L.G. and A.T.) for artificial insemination using the intended father's sperm and her own egg, agreeing to relinquish the child after birth. Prior to the child's birth, a juvenile court magistrate terminated the surrogate's parental rights and granted custody to the intended parents. Post-birth, J.J.E. sought to vacate the order and set aside the contract, but her motions were denied and subsequently affirmed by the juvenile court and Court of Appeals. The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that public policy does not prohibit traditional surrogacy contracts, but pre-birth termination of parental rights without statutory compliance is unenforceable. The Court vacated the portion of the order terminating J.J.E.'s parental rights but affirmed the judgments regarding paternity and custody, remanding the case to the juvenile court for determination of visitation and child support.

Surrogacy ContractTraditional SurrogacyParental Rights TerminationChild CustodyPaternity EstablishmentContract EnforceabilityPublic PolicyJuvenile Court JurisdictionAssisted Reproductive TechnologyFamily Law Appeal
References
58
Case No. 05-20-00380-CV, 05-20-00387-CV, 05-20-00388-CV, 05-20-00389-CV, 05-20-00390-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 05, 2022

Prestonwood Tradition, LP Tradition Management, LLC Prestonwood TSL, LP Prestonwood TSL GP, LLC v. Sherril Kerr, Individually and as the Independent and Representative

This dissenting opinion argues that the majority court erred by concluding that the trial court abused its discretion in determining gateway issues of arbitrability. Justice Partida-Kipness asserts that the trial court appropriately decided arbitrability because the American Arbitration Association (AAA) deferred the decision to the state court, and the Estate Representatives, as non-signatories, are not bound to arbitrate arbitrability simply by the incorporation of AAA rules. Furthermore, the dissent contends that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) is inapplicable as the transaction does not involve interstate commerce, thus making the Texas Arbitration Act (TAA) the governing law. Under the TAA, the arbitration agreements are deemed unenforceable for personal injury claims due to a lack of required signatures.

Arbitration AgreementArbitrabilityNon-SignatoryTexas Arbitration ActFederal Arbitration ActInterstate CommercePersonal InjuryAppellate ReviewContract EnforcementGateway Issues
References
62
Case No. 01-22-00651-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 13, 2023

Dawn Ursin, Individually and on Behalf of Ja'Cardo Hawkins v. Brand Energy Solution, Inc.

Dawn Ursin, individually and on behalf of her deceased son Ja’Cardo Hawkins, appealed the summary judgment rendered in favor of Brand Energy Solutions, Inc. in a wrongful-death suit. Hawkins, a Brand employee, died from natural causes (hypertrophic cardiomyopathy) on his first day of work. Ursin's initial claims for negligence, gross negligence, and products liability were dismissed via summary judgment. She then amended her petition to assert an intentional-tort claim. The trial court granted both Brand's traditional and no-evidence motions for summary judgment on this claim. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, noting Ursin’s failure to challenge the traditional summary judgment grounds on appeal.

wrongful deathsummary judgmentappellate procedureno-evidence motiontraditional motionintentional tortworkers' compensation insurancehypertrophic cardiomyopathyexclusive remedyTexas Court of Appeals
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Xue Ming Wang v. Abumi Sushi Inc.

Plaintiff Xue Ming Wang sued Abumi Sushi Inc. and Qing Zhong Li for Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), New York Labor Law (NYLL), and New York General Business Law § 349 violations, stemming from his employment as a delivery worker. The core legal dispute centered on whether the defendants, who acquired the restaurant's assets in June 2015, were liable for violations predating the sale under successor liability doctrines. The Court considered both traditional common-law and federal common-law 'substantial continuity' tests. It concluded that the traditional test did not apply due to lack of ownership continuity, and under the 'substantial continuity' test, the plaintiff failed to prove the defendants had notice of the alleged pre-sale violations. Consequently, the Court granted the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment, denied the plaintiff's motion, and dismissed claims related to pre-June 2, 2015 conduct against the appearing defendants.

Successorship LiabilityFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawGeneral Business Law § 349Wage and Hour ViolationsAsset SaleConstructive NoticeSummary JudgmentEmployment LawLabor Dispute
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Harris County v. Smith

The Smiths were injured in a 1994 automobile collision with Deputy Sheriff Spurgeon. A jury found Spurgeon's negligence caused the injuries and awarded the Smiths $95,100 in damages. Harris County appealed, challenging the inclusion of 'loss of earning capacity' for Lynn Smith and 'physical impairment' for Erica Smith in the broad-form damages question, arguing insufficient evidence. The appellate court agreed that the trial court erred in submitting these specific elements due to lack of evidence. However, it concluded that traditional harm analysis, rather than the 'presumed harm' standard from Crown Life Insurance Co. v. Casteel, applied to erroneously submitted elements of a broad-form damages question. Applying traditional harm analysis, the court found sufficient evidence to support the overall damages awarded to Lynn Smith for medical care, physical pain, and mental anguish, and to Erica Smith for medical care, physical pain, and mental anguish, rendering the errors in submitting the unsupported elements non-reversible. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

NegligenceDamagesJury VerdictBroad-form QuestionsHarm AnalysisPhysical ImpairmentLoss of Earning CapacityMedical CareCausationPre-existing Condition
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Flushing Traditional Acupuncture, P.C. v. Infinity Group

This case concerns a provider's action to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The defendant appealed a Civil Court order which granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denied the defendant's cross-motion. The Appellate Term affirmed the judgment, finding that the defendant failed to demonstrate it had timely requested verification, thus precluding certain defenses regarding fees exceeding the workers’ compensation schedule. Furthermore, while the defendant argued for exhaustion of policy limits, it did not meet its burden to show it was exempt from New York's financial security requirements for insurers, despite the policy being issued in Pennsylvania. The court concluded that the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact to warrant denying the plaintiff's summary judgment motion.

No-fault benefitsSummary judgmentInsurance claimsVerification requestsPolicy limitsFinancial securityAppellate reviewNew York lawDenial of claimExhaustion of benefits
References
5
Case No. ADJ7803069
Regular
Mar 22, 2016

EDILBERTO CERNA ROMERO vs. STONES AND TRADITIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the judge's finding regarding a September 14, 2015 utilization review (UR) decision. The Board found this second UR decision, which sought further information on some treatments, to be timely for all requested modalities. Consequently, the Board ruled that the UR decision of September 14, 2015, was timely, and the WCJ lacked jurisdiction to review the medical necessity of the denied treatments. The Board did not disturb the WCJ's finding that the August 12, 2015 UR decision was untimely.

Utilization ReviewTimelinessLabor Code Section 4610Request for AuthorizationDWC Form RFAIndependent Medical ReviewMedical NecessityProspective ReviewConcurrent ReviewAppeals Board
References
1
Case No. ADJ4258158 (OXN 0128983) ADJ4450153 (OXN 0136267)
Regular
Jun 01, 2010

BRENDA K. ROACH vs. BRIDAL TRADITIONS, CALIFORNIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, PREFERRED EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves California Indemnity Insurance Company (CIIC) seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Arbitrator's decision. CIIC disputes the finding of a single cumulative trauma injury period and the assigned date of injury, arguing for a longer exposure period. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the prior findings to establish one cumulative trauma injury from March 5, 1999, through November 24, 2002. The original decision regarding CIIC's contribution claim against Preferred Employers Insurance Company was otherwise affirmed.

Cumulative traumaDate of injuryLabor Code section 5412Labor Code section 5500.5Petition for ContributionReconsiderationFindings and OrderCompromise and ReleaseAnti-merger statutesApportionment
References
2
Case No. SFO 0486173
Regular
Mar 21, 2008

PEGGY SHOMAKER vs. TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH, THE CITIES GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, affirming the prior award using the 1997 disability schedule. The Board found that the employer provided proper notice under Labor Code section 4061, even though the applicant received Labor Code section 4850 salary continuation benefits instead of traditional temporary disability. This notice requirement, as interpreted by the Board, dictated the application of the older disability rating schedule for pre-2005 injuries.

Labor Code section 4850Permanent DisabilityTemporary DisabilityLabor Code section 4061Labor Code section 4660(d)ReconsiderationFindings and AwardSalary continuationModified dutyFull duty
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 124 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