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
Jul 02, 2010

Blyer v. ONE STOP KOSHER SUPERMARKET, INC.

Alvin Blyer, Regional Director of NLRB Region 29, petitioned the District Court for interim relief against One Stop Kosher Supermarket, Inc. under 29 U.S.C. § 160(j). The Director sought an order compelling One Stop to bargain with Local 338, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, after One Stop failed to honor a recognition agreement. The administrative law judge (ALJ) found the recognition agreement binding. The District Court granted the petition, finding reasonable cause for unfair labor practices and irreparable harm to the Union's collective bargaining rights, ordering One Stop to provide information and bargain, but stipulating that any agreement not be implemented until the NLRB's final decision.

National Labor Relations BoardUnfair Labor PracticesInterim InjunctionCollective BargainingUnion RecognitionLabor LawDistrict CourtSection 10(j)Employer-Union RelationsMandatary Injunction
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. v. United Food & Commercial Workers' Union Local 342

Plaintiff Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC ("Stop & Shop") sought a preliminary injunction to prevent Defendant United Food and Commercial Workers’ Union Local 342 ("Local 342" or "the union") from proceeding with an arbitration demand. The arbitration involves Stop & Shop's unilateral implementation of the "LMS system," an electronic system for managing inventory and manpower, which the union alleges violates their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Stop & Shop argues the arbitration clause in the CBA does not cover the LMS system. The Court asserted jurisdiction under the Labor Management Relations Act. Applying the principles from the "Steelworkers Trilogy," the court found the CBA's arbitration clause to be broad and determined that the union presented colorable arguments that the dispute regarding the LMS system implicates provisions related to "Prior Privileges" and "technological changes" in the CBA, as well as hours and wages. The court concluded that it could not say with "positive assurance" that the arbitration clause is not susceptible to an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Consequently, the court denied Stop & Shop's request for a preliminary injunction, allowing the arbitration to proceed.

Labor ArbitrationCollective BargainingPreliminary InjunctionArbitrabilityLabor DisputeLMS SystemUnion RightsEmployer Management RightsFederal CourtStatutory Interpretation
References
11
Case No. 07-04-0304-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 02, 2005

State v. Andrew Bennett Lockhart

The State appealed the trial court's order granting Andrew Bennett Lockhart's motion to suppress evidence obtained from a traffic stop. Department of Public Safety trooper Chris Ecker stopped Lockhart after observing his vehicle's right tires cross the solid white line on Interstate 40. Following a warning citation and a consensual vehicle search, marijuana was discovered, leading to Lockhart's prosecution. The trial court initially granted the motion to suppress, citing Ecker's 'hunch' and lack of observed criminal offense prior to the stop. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, deferring to the trial court's factual finding that Lockhart did cross the fog line, which provided probable cause for the traffic stop under the Texas Transportation Code. The court emphasized that an officer's subjective motive does not invalidate an objectively reasonable stop based on an observed traffic violation.

traffic stopmotion to suppressprobable causereasonable suspicionTexas Transportation Codedriving on improved shoulderappellate reviewjudicial discretioncredibility of witnessessearch and seizure
References
57
Case No. E2001-02090-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 14, 2002

Kelso Oil v. East West Truck Stop

This appeal centers on an Unconditional Guaranty signed by Frank Webb, president and owner of East West Truck Stop, Inc., guaranteeing the company's debt to Kelso Oil Company, Inc. The primary dispute involved whether the trial court improperly used parol evidence to identify the 'buyer' in the guaranty as the corporate entity, rather than 'Frank Webb d/b/a East West Truck Stop', which Webb argued violated the Statute of Frauds. Webb also contested the finding of adequate consideration and the dismissal of a counterclaim alleging usurious late charges. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the 'buyer' was sufficiently identified as the corporate entity, thereby preventing the guaranty from being an 'exercise in futility'. The court also found sufficient consideration for the guaranty and upheld the dismissal of the usury counterclaim.

GuarantyStatute of FraudsParol EvidenceCorporate DebtPersonal LiabilityForbearanceConsiderationUsuryLate ChargesContract Interpretation
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

El Hassanein v. Yankee Stop Corp.

Claimant alleged an injury at Yankee Stop Corporation's delicatessen on January 23, 2005, and filed for workers' compensation benefits. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially denied the claim, ruling no employer-employee relationship existed. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this decision even after reopening the record for further evidence. The appellate court upheld the Board's determination, finding substantial evidence in the testimony of Yankee's owners, who denied claimant's employment, despite conflicting evidence. The court concluded that the Board was entitled to credit the owners' testimony and dismissed the claimant's allegations of WCLJ bias.

Workers' CompensationEmployer-Employee RelationshipSubstantial EvidenceFactual DeterminationCredibility of TestimonyAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardDenial of BenefitsJudicial Bias ClaimDelicatessen Injury
References
2
Case No. 06-08-00029-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 16, 2008

Stevie Walker v. State

Stevie Walker appealed his conviction for possession of a controlled substance, crack cocaine, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Officer Brian Pool, accompanied by Officer Travis Shirley, stopped Walker's vehicle after observing him fail to properly signal two turns. During the temporary detention, Pool discovered Walker in possession of a rock of crack cocaine. Walker contended Pool lacked specific, articulable facts to support reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop, but the court found that an officer may lawfully stop a person for a traffic violation committed in their presence. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that Pool had an objectively reasonable basis to detain Walker for a personally observed violation of the Texas Transportation Code.

Traffic stopMotion to suppressReasonable suspicionFourth AmendmentControlled substanceCrack cocaineTexas Transportation CodeSignalling violationPretext stopAppellate review
References
13
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00660
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 2020

Matter of Jones v. General Traffic Equip. Corp.

Claimant Renford Jones, who sustained a work-related back injury resulting in a permanent partial disability, sought a hearing to modify his reduced earnings awards. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) modified the awards. The employer, General Traffic Equipment Corp., and the State Insurance Fund (SIF) appealed the WCLJ's decision to the Workers' Compensation Board, but their application for Board review was denied due to alleged incompleteness, specifically the omission of the hearing date for their objection. SIF's subsequent application for reconsideration was also denied. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Board's decision, finding that SIF's response, which provided the exact time of the objection in the digital audio recording of the sole hearing, adequately met the regulatory requirements. The court remitted the matter to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with its decision, dismissing the appeal from the denial of reconsideration as academic.

Workers' CompensationAdministrative ProcedureBoard ReviewRegulatory InterpretationAppellate ReviewProcedural Due ProcessWorkers' Compensation Law JudgeDigital Audio RecordingPleadings and MotionsDisability Benefits
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 1979

Fiat Motors of North America, Inc. v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation

Plaintiff Fiat Motors of North America, Inc. sought a preliminary injunction to prevent the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) from holding a hearing concerning alleged defects in Fiat vehicles and a repurchase campaign. Fiat contended it was deprived of adequate notice, an opportunity to present its views, and a hearing before an impartial tribunal. The court, presided over by District Judge Metzner, applied the exhaustion of remedies doctrine, emphasizing that judicial intervention is typically warranted only after a final agency determination. The court denied Fiat's motion, finding that Fiat received reasonable notice, its constitutional claims could be addressed at the hearing and were subject to de novo review, and there was insufficient evidence of agency bias. Consequently, the court ordered the hearing to proceed as scheduled on September 28, 1979.

Preliminary InjunctionAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewExhaustion of RemediesDue ProcessAdequate NoticeImpartial TribunalNational Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationVehicle SafetyProduct Recall
References
9
Case No. 13-13-00205-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 2014

Aon Risk Services Southwest, Inc. v. C.L. Thomas, Inc. and Speedy Stop Food Stores, LLC.

Aon Risk Services Southwest, Inc. (Aon) appeals a judgment in favor of Speedy Stop Food Store, LLC and C.L. Thomas, Inc. (Thomas). Aon was Thomas's insurance broker and was alleged to have breached a fee agreement by advising Thomas that copyright infringement coverage did not exist for the Interplan Suit and for failing to timely notify Lexington Insurance Company of the suit. Thomas incurred substantial attorney's fees defending the Interplan Suit, which was later dismissed. The trial court determined that the Lexington Policy would have provided coverage if timely notice had been given. Aon contended that Thomas could not bring a breach of contract claim, that the award of attorney's fees was improper, and that there was insufficient evidence for the attorney's fee award. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the legal determination of coverage, the breach of contract claim, or the award of attorney's fees.

Insurance Broker LiabilityBreach of ContractDuty to DefendAttorney FeesCopyright InfringementSummary JudgmentEight-Corners RuleInsurance Coverage DisputeTimely NoticeAppellate Review
References
16
Case No. 06-10-00082-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 08, 2010

Jonathan Bernard Morgan v. State

Jonathan Bernard Morgan, a convicted felon, appealed his conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm after a pistol was found in a rented truck he was driving during a traffic stop for speeding. Morgan contended that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient to prove he possessed the weapon and that his detention was unduly prolonged, making the search improper. The Court of Appeals found the evidence sufficient, noting the gun was in a vehicle driven by Morgan, the only occupant, and was conveniently accessible. The court also concluded that the detention was not unduly prolonged because the officer was still processing the traffic stop and running checks on Morgan's license and vehicle registration when consent to search was obtained. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

Unlawful Possession of FirearmFelon in PossessionTraffic StopConsensual SearchFourth AmendmentTexas ConstitutionLegal SufficiencyFactual SufficiencyProlonged DetentionCriminal Appeal
References
27
Showing 1-10 of 428 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