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
Mar 29, 2006

Ochei v. Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital

Plaintiff Joan Ochei brought an action against Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital and New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, alleging discrimination based on race and national origin, a hostile work environment, and retaliation, leading to constructive discharge. Ochei, a Licensed Practical Nurse, claimed inadequate training, negative evaluations, and transfer were discriminatory. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Ochei failed to establish a prima facie case. The court granted summary judgment, dismissing the complaint, finding no evidence to support Ochei's claims of discrimination, a hostile work environment, or constructive discharge. Additionally, Coler/Goldwater Memorial Hospital was deemed not a suable entity.

DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentRetaliationConstructive DischargeSummary JudgmentEmployment LawTitle VIINew York State Human Rights Law
References
47
Case No. 2-05-303-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 30, 2006

Sally Downs v. Triad-Denton Hospital, L.P. D/B/A Denton Community Hospital

Sally Downs, a licensed vocational nurse employed by Advantage Nursing Services, Inc., sustained injuries after slipping and falling on a wet floor at Triad-Denton Hospital, where she was temporarily assigned. Downs received workers' compensation benefits through her employer's policy. She subsequently sued the Hospital for her injuries. The Hospital moved for summary judgment, asserting the affirmative defense of the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act’s exclusive remedy provision, arguing Downs was a borrowed servant. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Hospital. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case, holding that the trial court erred because the Hospital failed to specially plead the affirmative defense as required by Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 94, and Downs had properly objected to this omission.

Workers' CompensationBorrowed Servant DoctrineSummary JudgmentAffirmative DefenseExclusive RemedyTexas Labor CodeAppellate ProcedureProcedural ErrorPersonal InjuryPremises Liability
References
2
Case No. 13-98-614-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 2000

Ajibade, Caleb v. Edinburg General Hospital, A/K/A Edinburg Hospital

Caleb Ajibade, an injured worker, appealed the denial of his supplemental income benefits, initially filing a petition against Edinburg General Hospital (mistakenly believing it was owned by the City of Edinburg) and later naming the City. The trial court granted summary judgment for both defendants. On appeal, the Court of Appeals addressed issues including the timeliness of appellees' supplemental motion for summary judgment, the judge's signature, whether the statute of limitations was tolled by due diligence in serving citation, the requirement of simultaneous filing with the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (TWCC), and the liability of the City of Edinburg. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the City of Edinburg, finding no basis for liability. However, it reversed the judgment in favor of Edinburg Hospital and remanded the case for further proceedings, determining that the affirmative defense of limitations was not conclusively established and that failure to provide simultaneous notice to the TWCC only warrants abatement, not dismissal.

Workers' CompensationSummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsDue DiligenceAppellate ProcedureHospital LiabilityMunicipal LiabilityTexas Court of AppealsAbatementService of Process
References
17
Case No. M2009-02165-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 26, 2010

Tonya Gager v. River Park Hospital

Tonya Gager, a nurse practitioner, sued River Park Hospital for retaliatory discharge under common law and the Tennessee Public Protection Act after her assignment at the hospital was terminated due to a new patient communication policy. The trial court granted summary judgment for the hospital, concluding that Ms. Gager was not an employee of River Park and that the hospital did not terminate her employment. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed this decision, finding that Ms. Gager was not a 'loaned servant' of River Park for the purpose of her retaliatory discharge claim and that River Park lacked the authority to terminate her, only to request her reassignment.

Retaliatory DischargeEmployment LawNurse PractitionerSummary JudgmentLoaned Servant DoctrineTennessee Public Protection ActEmployer-Employee RelationshipContractual AgreementAppellate ReviewHospital Policy
References
27
Case No. 03-00-00766-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 28, 2002

Jacqueline Tomhave v. the Oaks Psychiatric Hospital, Inc.

Jacqueline Tomhave, a therapist, was terminated by The Oaks Psychiatric Hospital after inquiring about an alleged inappropriate relationship between an employee and a juvenile resident. She claimed whistleblower protection under the Texas Health & Safety Code, asserting a causal link between her report and termination. The hospital moved for summary judgment, arguing Tomhave was fired for violating various policies and procedures concerning the juvenile's treatment and discharge. This dissenting opinion contends that Tomhave failed to present sufficient evidence to rebut the hospital's legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons, arguing that temporal proximity and subjective belief alone are insufficient. The dissent concludes that the trial court correctly granted summary judgment in the hospital's favor.

Whistleblower ActRetaliatory DischargeSummary JudgmentEmployment LawMental Health FacilityPolicy ViolationsTherapist TerminationTravis CountyTexas Court of AppealsCausation Element
References
24
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 08335
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 13, 2016

Irizarry v. St. Barnabas Hospital

In this medical malpractice action, Julia Irizarry, the plaintiff, alleged injury to her left leg due to St. Barnabas Hospital staff members' failure to alert the attending physician, George Piccorelli, M.D., about issues she faced before discharge. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, granted summary judgment to St. Barnabas Hospital and associated defendants, dismissing the complaint. The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed this judgment. The court found that St. Barnabas staff, including social workers and physical therapists, were working under Dr. Piccorelli's supervision and were not liable for invading a physician's responsibility. Defendants Adekunle and Solis, residents, also worked under Dr. Piccorelli's supervision and did not exercise independent medical judgment in the discharge decision.

Medical MalpracticeSummary JudgmentHospital NegligencePhysician SupervisionDischarge PlanningAppellate ReviewVicarious LiabilityResidency TrainingStaff ResponsibilityLack of Independent Judgment
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re New York Methodist Hospital

New York Methodist Hospital filed an order to show cause on June 1, 2009, seeking a judgment under Public Health Law § 2801-c to compel respondent E.H. to discharge himself from the hospital and accept placement in a skilled nursing facility. The hospital also sought to seal court records. Respondent, E.H., opposed the discharge. A bedside hearing was conducted on June 2, 2009, where testimony from medical staff and family members was heard. The court found that E.H., a 32-year-old bedridden male with complex medical needs, no longer required acute hospital care and was competent to make decisions, but unreasonably refused discharge plans. Despite the hospital's diligent search, the only facility willing and able to meet his needs was Daughters of Jacob Nursing Home (DOJ), which E.H. refused. The court granted the hospital's application for an injunction to compel E.H.'s discharge and to accept appropriate placement, and also granted the request to seal the court records to protect his medical privacy.

Patient DischargeInjunctionPublic Health LawMedical CapacityNursing Home PlacementHospital Discharge PlanningPatient RightsSealing Court RecordsMedicare/Medicaid ServicesSkilled Nursing Facility
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 07, 1975

Buchanan v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

The case concerns an appeal challenging a hospital lien and the application of a contractual period of limitations in an insurance policy. The plaintiff, as executrix of Percy Buchanan, sought to challenge a lien filed by the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation and compel Associated Hospital Services (AHS) to cover remaining hospital costs. The lower court initially granted AHS summary judgment, finding the action time-barred. However, the appellate court modified this decision, denying AHS's cross-motion for summary judgment. It ruled that a question of fact existed regarding whether AHS could be estopped from asserting the limitations period, given its silence on claim rejections until after the period had expired.

Hospital LienContractual Limitations PeriodSummary Judgment MotionEquitable EstoppelHealth Insurance PolicyStatute of LimitationsAppellate Court DecisionInsurance Coverage DisputeExecutorshipGroup Health Insurance
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Yarde v. Good Samaritan Hospital

This decision addresses motions for summary judgment in a case involving claims of racially-motivated discharge, hostile work environment, and unfair representation. Plaintiff, a black nurse named Yarde, was terminated from Good Samaritan Hospital (GSH) for breaching patient confidentiality and failing to attend investigatory meetings. The court dismissed her claims of discriminatory and retaliatory discharge against GSH, as well as all claims against her union (1199 SEIU) and its representative Lorraine Freiberg, finding no sufficient evidence of discrimination, retaliation, or unfair representation. However, the court denied GSH's motion for summary judgment regarding Yarde's hostile work environment claim against GSH and its employees Elizabeth Burton and Linda Bassi, allowing that specific claim to proceed to trial due to unresolved factual disputes concerning racial remarks and differential treatment.

Summary JudgmentRacial DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentUnfair RepresentationPatient Confidentiality BreachWorkplace RetaliationEmployment LawUnion GrievanceNurse TerminationChemical Dependency Unit
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cooper v. Jackson-Madison County General Hospital District

Joe B. Cooper filed an employment discrimination suit against Jackson-Madison County General Hospital District (JMCGHD) on May 12, 2009, alleging race, color, and sex discrimination under Title VII. Cooper, a licensed clinical social worker, claimed his supervisor, Sheila Odom, created a hostile work environment through condescending behavior and racial slurs like "whitey" and "white boy," leading to his constructive discharge. The defendant moved for summary judgment. The court dismissed claims of sex and color discrimination due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies with the EEOC. While acknowledging Odom's African-American race satisfied the "background circumstances" for reverse discrimination, the court found Cooper failed to present evidence of similarly situated African-American employees receiving better treatment. The court also concluded that most of Odom's alleged harassing behavior was racially neutral and that the racial comments lacked sufficient specificity and pervasiveness to establish a hostile work environment or constructive discharge. Consequently, the court granted JMCGHD's motion for summary judgment on all remaining claims.

Employment DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentReverse DiscriminationSummary JudgmentTitle VIIRacial HarassmentConstructive DischargeFederal Rules of Civil ProcedureEEOCWorkplace Harassment
References
45
Showing 1-10 of 12,214 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