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

Psihoyos v. National Geographic Society

This case concerns a copyright infringement dispute brought by Louis Psihoyos against The National Geographic Society (NGS). Psihoyos alleged that NGS infringed copyrights in his photograph of a dinosaur fossil and an accompanying illustration by publishing similar works in its magazine. NGS moved for summary judgment, arguing the similarities were due to unprotectible elements like common subject matter, or covered by doctrines such as merger and scenes a faire. The court analyzed the substantial similarity of the photographs, illustrations, and overall layout, finding that protectible elements were not substantially similar. Ultimately, the court granted NGS's motion for summary judgment and denied Psihoyos's cross-motion.

Copyright InfringementPhotographyIllustrationSummary JudgmentSubstantial SimilarityMerger DoctrineScenes A FaireIntellectual PropertyArtistic WorksDinosaur Fossil
References
33
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. ADJ20141319
Regular
Jun 20, 2025

CHARLES FRANKLIN vs. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

Applicant Charles Franklin sustained a low back injury. Defendant County of San Bernardino filed a petition for reconsideration concerning a scrivener's error in the case number and the geographic reasonableness of the applicant's chosen treating physician, Dr. Nassos. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to correct the case number from ADJ20141320 to ADJ20141319. However, the Board denied the substantive arguments, affirming the original decision that the defendant failed to demonstrate the unreasonableness of Dr. Nassos's geographic location for treatment by not presenting evidence of a suitable alternative closer to the applicant's residence.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONLABOR CODE SECTION 5909TIMELY ACTIONELECTRONIC ADJUDICATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMTRANSMISSION DATEBUSINESS DAYNOTICE OF TRANSMISSIONREPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONSCRIVENER'S ERROR
References
5
Case No. ADJ532181 (SFO 0438716) ADJ250509 (SFO 0242560) ADJ6545137
Regular
Nov 14, 2014

MICHAEL THOMAS, vs. SAFEWAY STORES, INC. Permissibly Self-Insured,

This case involved an applicant seeking treatment from a highly specialized surgeon, Dr. Matsen, located in Seattle, for a complex shoulder revision. The original decision denied authorization for Dr. Matsen, deeming Seattle outside a reasonable geographic area, and excluded a crucial report from the applicant's treating physician, Dr. Osborn. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, admitting Dr. Osborn's report, which strongly supported Dr. Matsen's expertise and the inadequacy of local Bay Area surgeons for this complex case. Based on the applicant's medical history and the availability of specialized treatment, the Board reversed the original decision, finding Dr. Matsen to be within a reasonable geographic area.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReasonable geographic areaTreating surgeonAdministrative Director Rule 9780Labor Code section 4600Orthopedic surgeonTotal shoulder replacementRevision surgeryMedical historyPhysician competency
References
1
Case No. 14-00-00173-CV; 14-00-00580-CV (Consolidated)
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 21, 2002

Nabors Industries, Inc., Nabors Drilling USA, Inc., Nabors Loffland Drilling Co., Nabors Energy Services, Inc. v. Chesapeake Operating Inc. and Chesapeake Energy Corporation

This case consolidates two appeals arising from personal injury claims at a Louisiana drilling site, focusing on the enforceability of oilfield indemnity provisions. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, withdrew a previous opinion and reviewed whether Texas or Louisiana law should apply to these contract clauses. The majority applied Texas law, affirming one trial court's judgment and reversing and remanding another, citing principles of contractual freedom and the domicile of the parties. Dissenting opinions contended that Louisiana law should govern due to the location of the accidents and Louisiana's strong public policy, advocating for a geographical-based analysis to ensure predictability and prevent forum shopping.

Oilfield IndemnityChoice of LawConflict of LawsRestatement (Second) of Conflict of LawsTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeLouisiana Revised StatutesContractual FreedomEn Banc ReviewPersonal InjuryDrilling Contracts
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2006

Lawrence Teachers Ass'n v. Lawrence Public Schools

This case concerns an appeal by the Lawrence Teachers Association (petitioner) challenging the denial of their petition to confirm an arbitration award. The arbitration award mandated Lawrence Public Schools (respondent) to designate members of the petitioner’s bargaining unit to provide special education services outside the school district's geographical boundaries. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, denied the petition, concluding the award was unenforceable. The appellate court affirmed this decision, ruling that the arbitration award violated public policy as it contravened Education Law former § 3602-c (2). This statute required the school district to contract with the school district where the nonpublic school attended by the pupil was located for such services. The court emphasized that an arbitrator's award cannot stand if it is contrary to well-defined statutory law and public policy.

Arbitration AwardPublic PolicyEducation LawSpecial Education ServicesCollective BargainingStipulationStatutory ViolationAppellate ReviewSchool District ObligationsLabor Dispute
References
4
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. ADJ2124401
Regular
Apr 09, 2014

THOMAS ENGLE vs. COPY RIGHT PRINTING SYSTEMS, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's Petition for Removal regarding a change of hearing location from Santa Barbara to Oxnard. The Board reasoned that the Division of Workers' Compensation has budgetary constraints and the inherent power to manage its calendars, including changing hearing locations due to space limitations at the Santa Barbara satellite office. The Board noted that CourtCall and other options exist for participants who have difficulty traveling to Oxnard.

RemovalPetition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCABDivision of Workers' CompensationDWCVenueDistrict OfficeSatellite OfficeCourtCall
References
1
Case No. ADJ10053885
Regular
Dec 24, 2015

MARK NEVITT vs. PARAMOUNT PAINTING, MARKEL SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the applicant's petition for removal, overturning an order denying a change of venue. The WCAB found that venue was proper in Santa Barbara because the applicant resides and his attorney's principal place of business is located there. The Board determined that the Santa Barbara office provides the same essential services as other district offices, making it a valid location for venue under Labor Code section 5501.5. Consequently, the case venue was transferred to the Santa Barbara District Office.

Petition for RemovalOrder Denying Change of VenueLabor Code Section 5501.5VenueDistrict OfficeSanta Barbara District OfficeSan Luis Obispo District OfficeApplicant's ResidencePlace of InjuryAttorney's Principal Place of Business
References
3
Case No. ADJ1210556 (AGO 0018589)
Regular
Oct 10, 2008

EDWIN MILLER vs. KEEBLER COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's petition for removal and granted reconsideration of the WCJ's prior decisions regarding medical mileage and penalties. The Board found the WCJ failed to properly consider statutory factors in determining a "reasonable geographic area" for the applicant's medical treatment. Consequently, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's decisions and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision addressing all outstanding issues, including the definition of a reasonable geographic area for treatment.

WCABPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationMedical MileageReasonable Geographic AreaLabor Code Section 4600Administrative Director Rule 9780(h)WCJBoltonRamirez
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 405 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