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. 10-06-00281-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 09, 2008

Tami Berger Martin v. Clyde C. Berger, Individually, as Administrator of the Estate of Mildred Jacquelyn Berger, and as Trustee of the Berger Trust

Tami Berger Martin intervened in the administration of Mildred Jacquelyn Berger's estate, alleging that a trust and will existed in her favor and an interest in Exxon Mobil stock. A jury determined no such trust or will had been created. Martin appealed, arguing the trial court erred by denying her motion for new trial and allowing cross-examination about a tape-recorded statement. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding Martin failed to preserve her complaints for appeal by not raising them timely or seeking further relief. The appellee's cross-point for sanctions due to a frivolous appeal was also denied, as Martin's complaint, though unpreserved, had arguable merit.

Appellate ReviewDiscovery ViolationsMotion for New TrialCross-ExaminationEvidence AdmissibilityEstate AdministrationTrusts and WillsFrivolous AppealSanctions DeniedPreservation of Error
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2006

State ex. rel. Flowers v. Tennessee Trucking Ass'n Self Insurance Group Trust

This appeal involves three members of a workers’ compensation self-insured group trust, Ocoee River Transport, Western Express, Inc., and DCI Transportation, LLC, challenging two trial court orders. The appellants were held in contempt and sanctioned for failing to make periodic payments of assessments as ordered by the court. Additionally, one appellant contested the assessment of the Liquidator’s administrative fees, arguing they were denied the opportunity for discovery regarding the reasonableness and necessity of these fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding of contempt and the imposition of sanctions. However, the court reversed the decision regarding administrative fees, remanding the issue for further proceedings to allow for appropriate discovery and a determination of the applicability of privilege or work product doctrine to the Liquidator's records.

contemptworkers' compensationself-insured group trustliquidationadministrative feesdiscoverydue processwillfulnesssanctionsappellate review
References
66
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08595 [156 AD3d 1043]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 07, 2017

New York State Workers' Compensation Board v. Any-Time Home Care Inc.

The New York State Workers' Compensation Board, acting as administrator for a dissolved self-insured trust, initiated an action to recover a $133 million cumulative deficit from former trust members. Various defendants sought to dismiss the complaint, asserting claims were time-barred by a three-year statute of limitations for statutory liabilities, failed to adequately state claims against individual partners, and were barred by the doctrine of laches. The Supreme Court denied these motions. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, ruling that the claims were contractual, subject to a six-year limitation period, and that laches did not apply against the state enforcing a public right. The court also found the complaint sufficiently specific regarding the liability of individual defendants.

Workers' Compensation LawSelf-Insurance TrustJoint and Several LiabilityStatute of LimitationsContractual LiabilityLaches DoctrineAppellate ReviewGroup Self-InsurerDeficit RecoveryPartnership Liability
References
16
Case No. 04-14-00657-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2015

Richard Leshin, Successor Trustee of the Davila Family Trust, Trust A v. Juan Gerardo Oliva, Rosina Oliva, Individually and as Successor Trustee of the Davila Family Trusts B, C, and D, and Alma Guadalupe Davila

A party who seeks to vacate an arbitration award bears the burden in the trial court of bringing forth a complete record that establishes its basis for vacating the award. Leshin has completely failed to carry his burden because he has come forth only with a partial record. Leshin has not brought forth a record showing that he was not brought into arbitration in a manner that would render him individually liable. For this reason alone, the trial court was correct in confirming the arbitrator’s award. In any case, the matters in the record clearly establish that the arbitrator was well within his power to determine that Leshin was individually liable for his wrongful acts. The AAA Commercial Rules of Arbitration, which apply to this matter, provide that the arbitrator had the power to rule on his own jurisdiction, 'including any objections with respect to the . . . scope . . . of the arbitration agreement or to the arbitrability of any claim or counterclaim.' Finally, the Texas Trust Code is clear that a trustee is always individually liable for his wrongful acts committed as trustee, so it was not necessary to sue Leshin in any particular capacity.

ArbitrationTrustee LiabilityTrust DisputeArbitration AwardAppellate ReviewJurisdictionArbitrabilityTexas LawCommercial Arbitration RulesDavila Family Trust
References
26
Case No. 02-20-00224-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 14, 2021

Regina Nachael Howell Foster v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trustee for Morgan Stanley ABS Capital 1 Inc. Trust 2005-HE1, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-HE 1

Regina Nachael Howell Foster used her property as collateral for her husband's mortgage refinance loan. After her husband defaulted, she sued Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company to invalidate the deed-of-trust lien and stop foreclosure. Her initial suit was unsuccessful. Following a foreclosure sale, Foster initiated a second lawsuit, challenging the foreclosure procedures and reasserting the invalidity of the deed-of-trust lien. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. On appeal, Foster challenged this summary judgment, primarily arguing that she did not receive the required notice of default under the Texas Property Code and that the lien was invalid under the Texas Constitution. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that Foster's contentions regarding lien invalidity were without merit and that she was not entitled to notice of default.

MortgageForeclosureDeed of TrustHomesteadSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewTexas ConstitutionProperty CodeNotice of DefaultLien Invalidity
References
45
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 08244
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 22, 2017

Matter of New York State Workers' Compensation Bd. v. Murray Bresky Consultants, Ltd

This appeal concerns the allocation of settlement proceeds from a defunct group self-insured trust. The New York State Workers' Compensation Board, as administrator of the Manufacturing Self Insurance Trust Fund, sought judicial apportionment of settlement funds recovered from third parties. Murray Bresky Consultants, Ltd, a former member of the trust, objected to the Board receiving all proceeds and asserted a counterclaim for its share and an accounting. The Supreme Court granted the Board all proceeds and dismissed Murray Bresky's objections. The Appellate Division modified this decision, ruling that Murray Bresky was entitled to share in the jointly-recovered settlement proceeds and that the Board must file a verified accounting, remitting the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation LawSelf-Insurance TrustSettlement ProceedsJudicial ApportionmentVerified AccountingCPLR Article 77Contractual InterpretationTrust DeficitAppellate ReviewFiduciary Duty
References
13
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 05037 [163 AD3d 558]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 05, 2018

Matter of Empire State Transp. Workers' Compensation Trust v. Special Funds Conservation Comm.

This case concerns a proceeding initiated by Empire State Transportation Workers' Compensation Trust for judicial approval of a settlement, nunc pro tunc, against the Special Funds Conservation Committee. The underlying issue stemmed from the Trust's failure to obtain consent from the Special Funds for a claimant's personal injury settlement, which led the Workers' Compensation Board to find a waiver of reimbursement rights. After an initial denial by the Supreme Court, the Appellate Division reversed and remitted, affirming the court's discretion in compelling such consent. Upon remittitur, the Supreme Court granted the petition, directing the Special Funds to provide nunc pro tunc consent. The Appellate Division affirmed this subsequent order, concluding that the settlement was reasonable, the delay was adequately explained, and no prejudice was demonstrated against the Special Disability Fund.

Workers' CompensationNunc Pro TuncSettlement ApprovalPersonal Injury ActionSpecial Funds Conservation CommitteeAppellate DiscretionReimbursement WaiverJudicial ReviewAppellate PracticeNassau County
References
14
Case No. 07-03-0307-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 14, 2005

Rogers v. Ardella Veigel Inter Vivos Trust No. 2

This case concerns a dispute over the interpretation of a will and the administration of trusts. The appellants challenged a summary judgment related to their claims against Amarillo National Bank (ANB) for alleged breaches of fiduciary duty and a demand for accounting. The Court of Appeals of Texas, Amarillo, determined that the will created life estates, not trust interests, for the beneficiaries, modifying the lower court's judgment on this point. However, it affirmed the summary judgment concerning the statute of limitations, ruling that the appellants' claims for damages and accounting were time-barred. The court found the initial pleadings did not constitute proper counterclaims and rejected the application of the continuing tort theory.

Trust LawLife EstateStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentFiduciary DutyCounterclaimsAccountingWill ConstructionTestamentary TrustsInter Vivos Trusts
References
11
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 07909 [155 AD3d 1208]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 2017

NYAHSA Services, Inc., Self-Insurance Trust v. People Care Inc.

Plaintiff, a self-insured trust, commenced a collection action against defendant, a former member, for unpaid assessments related to workers' compensation claims. Defendant counterclaimed and filed a third-party action against Cool Insuring Agency, the trust's administrators, alleging mismanagement. During discovery, a dispute arose over a report commissioned by defendant's counsel from a consultant, which Cool and plaintiff sought to compel. Defendant asserted attorney-client privilege, attorney work product, and material prepared in anticipation of litigation. The Supreme Court partially granted the motions to compel, a decision largely affirmed by the Appellate Division, Third Department, with a modification regarding a specific email exchange found to be protected attorney work product.

Discovery DisputeAttorney-Client PrivilegeAttorney Work ProductMaterial Prepared for LitigationSelf-Insurance TrustWorkers' Compensation BenefitsBreach of ContractUnjust EnrichmentThird-Party ActionClaims Administration
References
20
Case No. 14-18-00274-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2020

Dr. Louis Patino, D.C. Dr. Stephen Wilson, M.D. And Dr. Gary Craighead, D.C. v. Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers' Compensation Commissioner Cassandra J. Brown and Dr. Donald Patrick, in Their Official and Individual Capacities State Office of Administrative Hearings, Texas Chief Administrative Law Judge Cathleen Parsley in Her Official Capacity Tommy Broyles, in His Official Capacity The State of Texas And the Attorney General of the State of Texas

Three doctors, Patino, Wilson, and Craighead, appealed the dismissal of their claims against the Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers’ Compensation and other state entities. The doctors were excluded from the state's workers' compensation approved doctor list between 2004 and 2007, leading to administrative penalties and a subsequent lawsuit. The trial court dismissed their claims for lack of jurisdiction, asserting immunity. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of claims challenging final agency orders due to unexhausted administrative remedies and collateral attack immunity. However, the court reversed the dismissal of the doctors' constitutional challenges to the Workers’ Compensation Act and ultra vires claims against the Commissioner, concluding these claims were properly pleaded and not barred by sovereign immunity.

Physician ExclusionAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewSovereign ImmunityUltra Vires ClaimsConstitutional ChallengeDue Process RightsProfessional LicensingGovernment RegulationTexas Labor Code
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 6,302 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