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. 2015-06-0977
Regular Panel Decision
May 21, 2019

Clay, Sharee v. Signature Healthcare

Ms. Clay, a CNA for Signature Healthcare, sustained neck and shoulder injuries while assisting a patient. Signature initially denied her workers' compensation claim, asserting her injuries were due to a prior car accident or pre-existing degenerative conditions. The Court found Ms. Clay's injuries were primarily work-related, crediting the testimony of Dr. Lanford and Dr. West. The Court ordered Signature Healthcare to provide ongoing medical treatment for her work-related injuries and pay her $20,731.50 in permanent partial disability benefits and $580.71 in temporary total disability benefits, totaling $21,312.21.

Workers' CompensationShoulder InjuryNeck InjuryCausationMedical TestimonyImpairment RatingDisability BenefitsTreating PhysicianIndependent Medical ExaminationCar Accident
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wilie v. Signature Geophysical Services, Inc.

Jerry and Natalie Wilie, individually and as next friends of their children, appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Signature Geophysical Services, Inc. and Elexco Corporation. The appeal stemmed from an automobile accident caused by Signature's employee, Jack Sonnier, while he was driving to pick up his paycheck after consuming alcohol. Appellants argued Sonnier was within the course and scope of his employment, challenged a misspelling of a defendant's name, and questioned the competency of summary judgment evidence due to defective affidavits. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that Sonnier was not in the course and scope of employment while commuting to work, distinguishing the case from injuries occurring on employer premises. The court also found the misspelling non-prejudicial and disregarded the defective affidavits but still concluded summary judgment was properly granted.

Respondeat SuperiorSummary JudgmentCourse and Scope of EmploymentCommuting RuleSpecial Mission ExceptionEmployer LiabilityAutomobile AccidentNegligenceAppellate ReviewTexas Civil Procedure
References
25
Case No. 2014-773 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 27, 2016

Laga v. Foremost Signature Ins. Co.

In this action, provider Adelaida M. Laga, as assignee of Jenny Jimenez, sought assigned first-party no-fault benefits from Foremost Signature Insurance Company. The Civil Court initially granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, thereby dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the defendant failed to legally establish that the fees charged exceeded the workers' compensation fee schedule. The Appellate Term, Second Department, reversed the Civil Court's order and denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment, siding with the plaintiff's argument.

No-fault benefitsSummary judgmentWorkers' compensation fee scheduleAppellate reviewInsurance claimMedical providerAssigneeCivil CourtAppellate TermDenial of benefits
References
1
Case No. 13-18-00186-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 30, 2020

International Paper Company v. Signature Industrial Services, LLC and Jeffry M. Ogden

International Paper Company (IP) appealed a jury verdict awarding damages to Signature Industrial Services, LLC (Signature) and Jeffry Ogden in a contract dispute over a slaker construction project. Signature alleged IP breached the contract by failing to pay invoices after verbally modifying Field Charge Order (FCO) submission procedures, leading to significant financial distress and a lost sale opportunity. Ogden claimed personal damages from IRS penalties and credit reputation harm. The appellate court affirmed Signature's breach of contract and associated actual damages but reversed fraud and promissory estoppel claims for Signature, and all claims for Ogden. It also reversed consequential damages related to the lost sale and IRS penalties for Signature, affirming only lost owners' equity.

Breach of ContractFraudPromissory EstoppelConsequential DamagesActual DamagesContract InterpretationIndemnificationExpert Witness TestimonySufficiency of EvidenceAppellate Review
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Korman v. Sachs

This case concerns an appeal challenging the invalidation of Lorraine Backal's designating petition for Judge of the Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County. The Supreme Court initially ruled her petition invalid, citing fewer than the required 5,000 signatures under Election Law § 6-136 (2) (b). On appeal, while the court upheld the factual finding of insufficient signatures, it deemed the 5,000-signature requirement for Bronx County unconstitutional. The court found this disparity, compared to 2,000 signatures for counties of similar population outside New York City, violated the Equal Protection Clause. Consequently, the judgment invalidating Backal's petition was reversed, and the Board of Elections was directed to place her name on the ballot.

Election LawDesignating PetitionsConstitutional LawEqual ProtectionBallot AccessSignature RequirementsJudicial ElectionsNew York StateAppellate ReviewSurrogate's Court
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Moskowitz v. Board of Elections

The petitioner, an orthodox observer of Jewish Sabbaths and religious holidays, sought an order to compel the Board of Elections of the City of New York to accept signatures for his independent nominating petition after the statutory deadline of September 21, 1966. He argued that religious observances prevented him and his campaign workers from collecting signatures for 8 days, requesting additional time. The court found this argument "specious," noting that 42 days were allotted, and the petitioner only obtained 99 signatures in the remaining 32 days. The petitioner's secondary argument, challenging the constitutionality of requiring 3,000 signatures for independent candidates versus 750 for party candidates, was also rejected, citing prior case law that upheld the distinction. Consequently, the court denied the application and dismissed the petition.

Election LawIndependent CandidateNominating PetitionsSignature RequirementsReligious ObservanceStatutory DeadlinesConstitutional ChallengeJudicial DiscretionCandidate EligibilityBoard of Elections
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Board of Directors of Rough Riders Landing Homeowners Ass'n v. Signature Group, LLC

Plaintiffs, an association and condominium boards in Montauk, New York, sued Signature Group, LLC and Selective Insurance Company of America to recover overpaid premiums on a Standard Flood Insurance Policy. The action was originally filed in state court and subsequently removed to federal court by the defendants. Plaintiffs moved to remand the case back to state court, arguing a lack of federal jurisdiction. The District Court, however, denied the motion, finding that federal question jurisdiction exists because the claims for refund of SFIP premiums implicate significant federal issues and federal funds, requiring uniform interpretation of the National Flood Insurance Program's manual.

Flood insuranceNational Flood Insurance ProgramNFIPStandard Flood Insurance PolicySFIPWrite-Your-Own ProgramWYOPFEMAFederal Emergency Management AgencyInsurance premiums
References
11
Case No. ADJ9921643
Regular
Jul 09, 2019

Katherine Turner vs. CITY OF CULVER CITY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a decision that deemed lien claims invalid due to electronic signatures on declarations. The Board found that electronic signatures, specifically the "S signature" format used in electronic filings, are legally sufficient under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. Consequently, the prior decision invalidating the liens based on the lack of a "wet" signature was rescinded, and the case was returned for further proceedings. The Board clarified that electronic signatures satisfy the requirements of Labor Code section 4903.8(d) declarations.

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)electronic signaturewet signaturepenalty of perjurylien claimantWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Order Granting Petition for Reconsiderationfindings of fact and ordersadministrative law judgeUniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA)
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fuchsberg v. Lomenzo

This case concerns cross-appeals from a Supreme Court judgment related to an independent nominating petition for Jacob D. Fuchsberg, a candidate for Chief Judge. The petitioner sought to validate his petition after the Secretary of State initially declared it void due to an insufficient number of valid signatures. The lower court found 20,170 valid signatures, exceeding the 20,000 required, and thus validated the petition. However, the appellate court performed its own physical count, determining only 19,714 valid signatures remained after subtracting invalid ones. The court also upheld the invalidation of signatures from individuals who voted in a primary election, irrespective of their specific vote for a candidate. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the lower court's judgment and dismissed the petition due to the insufficient number of valid signatures.

Election LawNominating PetitionSignaturesVoter DisqualificationPrimary ElectionAppellate ReviewReversalJudicial RecountCandidate EligibilitySecretary of State
References
6
Case No. ADJ9169097 (MF) ADJ9165067
Regular
Aug 09, 2019

Rosa Reyes vs. Nestle USA, ACE American Insurance

This case involved lien claimants whose liens were disallowed because their Labor Code section 4903.8(d) declarations were signed with electronic "S" signatures rather than wet signatures. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, holding that electronic signatures are valid for these declarations. The WCAB found that existing law and prior panel decisions support the use of electronic signatures, aligning with the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. The matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.

Labor Code section 4903.8(d)wet signatureelectronic signaturelien claimantsJoint Findings of Fact and OrderElectronic Adjudication Management SystemJET File Business RulesEAMS Rulespenalty of perjuryUniform Electronic Transactions Act
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 104 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