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. 02-15-00176-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 19, 2015

in the Interest of A.P., a Child

This is an appeal from a trial court's order terminating the parental rights of Mother and Father to their child, Timmy (A.P.). Mother and Father challenged the termination, arguing issues of involuntary relinquishment, ineffective assistance of counsel, and that termination was not in the child's best interest. The Department of Family and Protective Services presented evidence of parental drug use, criminal history, mental health issues, and an unstable home environment, leading to the child's removal multiple times. Both parents eventually signed affidavits of voluntary relinquishment of parental rights, which they later attempted to revoke, claiming duress or ineffective assistance. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding no abuse of discretion in denying new trials and that the signed relinquishment affidavits were sufficient to support the best interest finding for the child.

Parental Rights TerminationChild CustodyAffidavit of RelinquishmentIneffective Assistance of CounselDuressChild Best InterestDrug UseCriminal HistoryMental HealthAppellate Review
References
31
Case No. 03-16-00270-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2016

AC Interests L.P., Formerly American Coatings, L.P. v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

AC Interests, L.P. appeals the dismissal of its lawsuit against the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) concerning the denial of emission credits. AC Interests argues that the TCEQ's motion to dismiss under Rule 91a was improperly granted, as their claims have a basis in both law and fact. They contend that their application for emission credit certification met all legal requirements, and the TCEQ's decision was arbitrary and capricious. Furthermore, AC Interests highlights that the Commission has since indicated a willingness to allow emission credits for area sources, which they are classified as. The appellant asserts that procedural issues, including a shortened appeal time and an alleged violation of due process, unduly harmed their ability to obtain earned emission credits. AC Interests seeks a reversal of the district court's dismissal to pursue its claim for vested property rights in emission credits.

Emission CreditsEnvironmental LawAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewTCEQArea SourcesMotion to DismissAppellate ProcedureAir PollutionVOC Emissions
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In the Interest of E.A.K.

Mustofa K Khandokar appealed the termination of his parental rights to his minor child, E.A.K., after a jury found grounds for termination and that it was in the child's best interest. The appellate court found that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay documents, including child outcry statements, without proper foundation or reliability. These evidentiary errors were deemed harmful, likely leading to an improper judgment. Despite finding legally sufficient evidence on one ground for termination and the child's best interest based on properly admitted evidence, the court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Parental Rights TerminationChild Sexual Abuse AllegationsHearsay EvidenceBusiness Records ExceptionPublic Records ExceptionChild Outcry StatementsEvidentiary ErrorHarmless Error AnalysisLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceBest Interest of Child
References
0
Case No. 07-07-0126-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 28, 2008

in the Interest of M.D., a Child

Natasha and Timothy appealed the termination of their parental rights to their son, M.D. Their appeal challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, the child's best interest, and argued due process violations concerning the requirement to file a statement of points within fifteen days. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order, concluding that the parents' arguments on sufficiency of evidence, best interest, and public policy were not preserved due to untimely filing of the statement of points. Additionally, the court rejected their claims that the fifteen-day filing requirement for a statement of points violated their federal and state due process rights.

Parental RightsDue ProcessAppellate ProcedureSufficiency of EvidenceChild WelfareTexas Family LawStatement of PointsTimelinessAffirmationParental Rights Termination
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 26, 2011

United States Ex Rel. Lamesa National Bank v. Liberty Mutual Insurance (In Re Schooler)

This memorandum opinion addresses the motion for prejudgment interest filed by Lamesa National Bank (LNB) against Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. Liberty Mutual was previously found liable to the bankruptcy estate of Robert and Tina Schooler for $112,247.66. The court exercised its discretion to award prejudgment interest, citing federal law and a strong presumption in favor of such awards, which aim to compensate the estate for the loss of funds. Adopting guidance from state law for the interest rate, the court set it at 5.0% compounded annually, with accrual commencing from the complaint's filing date of September 8, 2009.

Prejudgment InterestBankruptcy EstateFederal LawDiscretionary AwardAccrual DateInterest RateFifth CircuitNorthern District of TexasBankruptcy CodeInsurance Liability
References
15
Case No. 2-09-140-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 15, 2010

in the Interest of B.J., a Child

Appellant J.J. appealed the termination of her parental rights to her daughter B.J. The trial court found J.J. had knowingly placed or allowed B.J. to remain in conditions that endangered her physical or emotional well-being and that termination was in B.J.'s best interest. Evidence included B.J.'s diagnosis of cellulitis and failure to thrive due to undernourishment and malnutrition, J.J.'s poor hygiene, irregular medication use for bipolar disorder, belligerent conduct in the hospital, failure to comply with CPS service plans (personal counseling, drug assessment, parenting classes), unstable housing and employment, and continued marijuana use despite deferred adjudication community supervision. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the evidence legally and factually sufficient to support the endangerment and best interest findings, and overruled J.J.'s constitutional challenges.

Parental RightsChild NeglectFailure to ThriveChild Protective ServicesBest Interest of ChildEvidentiary SufficiencyFamily LawTexasAppealMedical Neglect
References
10
Case No. 01-15-00571-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 25, 2015

in the Interest of A.G. and F.G., Children

This is an appellant's brief appealing the termination of parental rights for children A.G. and F.G., involving S.F. (mother) and the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS). DFPS intervened after reports of child neglect, including F.G. found unsupervised. The mother, S.F., has a history of mental health issues (depression, bipolar disorder), marijuana use, and unstable housing, and allegedly failed to comply with court-ordered service plans. The trial court terminated her parental rights under Texas Family Code Section 161.001(1)(D), (E), (L), and (O), also finding it to be in the children's best interest. The appellant argues that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient to support the termination and the 'best interest' finding, emphasizing A.G.'s expressed desire against termination and potential instability in the children's current kinship placement with their godmother.

Parental Rights TerminationChild NeglectInsufficient EvidenceBest Interest of ChildSubstance AbuseMental Health IssuesKinship PlacementDomestic RelationsTexas Family CodeAppellate Review
References
20
Case No. 12-22-00111-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 31, 2022

in the Interest of S. A. and R.T., Children

S.T. appealed the termination of her parental rights to S.A. and R.T., arguing insufficient evidence regarding serious physical or emotional damage to R.T., the children's best interest, and the trial court's discretion in conservatorship. The Department of Family and Protective Services initiated the termination due to parental drug use, domestic violence between S.T. and D.T., and S.T.'s anger issues. The court reviewed S.T.'s compliance with a family service plan, documented domestic violence incidents, and S.A.'s allegation of attempted drowning by D.T. The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was also considered, as R.T. is an Indian Child. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support the termination of S.T.'s parental rights and that the termination was in the children's best interest.

Parental Rights TerminationChild EndangermentDomestic ViolenceDrug AbuseIndian Child Welfare ActChild WelfareTexas Family CodeAppellate ReviewBest Interest of the ChildParental Anger Issues
References
45
Case No. 04-24-00436-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2024

In the Interest of J.A.T., a Child v. the State of Texas

This is an accelerated appeal from an order terminating the parental rights of J.G. (Mother) to her child, J.A.T. Mother challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for the best interest finding. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services initiated the termination petition due to concerns of child neglect and Mother's substance abuse. The trial court terminated parental rights based on statutory grounds including constructive abandonment, non-compliance with court orders, and endangering the child through substance abuse. Mother repeatedly tested positive for various illegal substances and did not complete court-ordered drug recovery or mental health services. J.A.T., diagnosed with autism, showed behavioral issues that improved during placement with maternal grandparents. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding the evidence legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination was in J.A.T.'s best interest, citing Mother's ongoing substance abuse and failure to address her issues.

Parental Rights TerminationChild CustodyBest Interest of ChildSufficiency of EvidenceAccelerated AppealSubstance AbuseDrug TestingMental HealthAutism Spectrum DisorderFamily Code
References
27
Case No. 06-19-00106-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 09, 2020

in the Interest of J.M. and L.M., Children

The Texas Sixth Appellate District Court of Appeals affirmed the termination of parental rights for Mother concerning her two children, J.M. and L.M. The trial court found statutory grounds for termination, including child abuse, neglect, and Mother's incarceration for family violence and drug offenses. Mother appealed, challenging the denial of a motion for continuance and the sufficiency of evidence regarding the children's best interests. The appellate court found Mother's procedural arguments unpreserved and upheld the trial court's determination that termination was in the children's best interests based on clear and convincing evidence of Mother's harmful actions and neglect. Additionally, Mother lacked standing to challenge the conservatorship determination after her parental rights were terminated.

Parental Rights TerminationChild AbuseNeglectFamily ViolenceDrug OffensesBest Interest of ChildAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceConservatorshipFoster Care
References
37
Showing 1-10 of 2,700 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