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

Beneficial Personnel Services of Texas, Inc. v. Rey

Ramon Rey, an oil field worker, sued Beneficial Personnel Services of Texas, Inc. (BPS) and Business Staffing, Inc. (BSI) after suffering a back injury. Rey's original employer, White Well Service, transitioned its employees to BPS/BSI, an employee leasing company, with promises of equivalent workers' compensation benefits. However, after Rey's injury, BPS/BSI significantly underpaid his benefits, delayed necessary surgery, and used an unlicensed insurance carrier. The jury found BPS committed fraud and that BPS and BSI operated as a single business enterprise, awarding Rey actual and exemplary damages, along with damages for mental anguish and damage to credit reputation. The trial court affirmed the judgment against both defendants, and this opinion upholds that decision, finding sufficient evidence for fraud, exemplary damages, and mental anguish, and that single business enterprise theory is a valid means of imposing tort liability.

Fraudulent InducementWorkers' Compensation PolicySingle Business Enterprise TheoryEmployee Leasing CompanyExemplary Damages AwardMental Anguish RecoveryCredit Reputation InjuryBreach of Employment ContractCorporate Veil PiercingUnlicensed Insurance Carrier

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

GAB Business Services, Inc. v. Moore

Sherry Moore, an employee of the City of Marshall, suffered a work-related injury in January 1987. Although GAB Business Services, the insurance adjuster, initially paid for some medical expenses, they denied weekly workers' compensation benefits for her back injury, claiming it was from a separate incident at home. Moore successfully appealed to the Industrial Accident Board and later won a bench trial, which found her back injury compensable and led to a lawsuit against GAB, the City, and the Risk Pool for bad faith and deceptive trade practices. A jury found in favor of Moore against GAB for $25,000 in actual damages and $75,000 in exemplary damages. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment against GAB, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings that GAB acted in bad faith by denying the claim without a reasonable basis, and engaged in unfair practices, causing Moore mental anguish damages. The court also rejected GAB's defenses of governmental and official immunity and upheld the trial court's evidentiary rulings.

Workers' Compensation ClaimsInsurance Bad FaithDeceptive Trade Practices ActSufficiency of EvidenceMental Anguish DamagesGovernmental ImmunityOfficial ImmunityIndependent ContractorJury InstructionsEvidentiary Rulings

References

Case No. 01-14-00687-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 13, 2015

the Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Houston, Inc., the Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Houston Education Foundation, Dan Parsons, Chris Church, Church Enterprises, Inc., Gary Milleson, Ronald N. McMillan, D' Artagnan Bebel, Mark Goldie, Cha v. John Moore Services, Inc. and John Moore Renovation, LLC

This document contains two responses from John Moore Services, Inc. and John Moore Renovation, LLC. The primary document, filed March 13, 2015, is a response to the Appellants' (Better Business Bureau et al.) objections to consolidation of related cases for submission. John Moore Services, Inc. and John Moore Renovation, LLC (Appellees) advocate for consolidation, asserting it would serve justice and efficiency by resolving all issues in a single judgment and prevent further confusion arising from separate appeals. The embedded document, filed June 12, 2014, is a response and objection to the Better Business Bureau's motion for attorneys' fees, court costs, expenses, and sanctions. John Moore argues that the requested fees are not reasonable or necessary, that the issue of reasonableness requires a jury trial, and that the supporting evidence (Elkin Affidavit and invoices) is legally insufficient and conclusory. Furthermore, John Moore contends that awarding fees at this stage would be neither just nor equitable, given the ongoing viable claims, and requests the court to deny the motion for fees, sustain their objections, grant their motion to consolidate, and compel discovery responses.

LitigationAttorney FeesCase ConsolidationAnti-SLAPP StatuteTexas Civil ProcedureAppellate PracticeJury TrialEvidence ObjectionsDiscovery DisputesLegal Fees Reasonableness

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Matthews v. Newspapers Inc.

Stanley B. Matthews sued Newspapers Incorporated for damages stemming from two newspaper articles published in July 1953, which he alleged were false and defamatory. The articles connected his business, the Texas Body Shop, and its employees to a "car wrecking ring" involved in insurance fraud. Matthews contended that these publications caused significant financial losses to his business and harmed his personal reputation. Although the trial court initially denied Matthews recovery, the appellate court reversed this decision. The higher court found that there was sufficient evidence to warrant a jury trial on whether the articles targeted Matthews and his business, and if he suffered damages. Additionally, the appellate court ruled that Matthews' failure to file an assumed name certificate did not preclude his right to pursue the lawsuit.

DefamationLibelNewspaper LiabilityBusiness DamagesReputation DamagesAssumed Name CertificatePrivileged PublicationAppellate ReviewReversed and RemandedJury Question

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 19, 2015

Schwarz v. Consolidated Edison, Inc.

Plaintiff, an ex-police officer with a 2002 perjury conviction related to the Abner Louima case, was hired by Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (ConEd) in November 2014 as a mechanic. He was terminated approximately two weeks later, with ConEd citing "potential disruption of business operations" and "damage to the Company’s reputation" due to his notoriety. Plaintiff sued ConEd, alleging unlawful employment discrimination based on his criminal conviction history under the New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law, incorporating Correction Law article 23-A. ConEd moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing it terminated him due to business disruption and reputational risk stemming from his notoriety, not the conviction itself. The court granted ConEd's motion to dismiss, ruling that article 23-A protects against discrimination based on actual convictions, not reputation or notoriety, and that vacated convictions are not legally cognizable "convictions" under the law.

Employment DiscriminationCriminal Conviction HistoryPerjury ConvictionWrongful TerminationHuman Rights LawCorrection Law Article 23-AReputational HarmNotorietyVacated ConvictionsMotion to Dismiss

References

Case No. 10-19-00004-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 27, 2022

Texas Central Business Lines Corporation v. U.S. Polyco, Inc.

Texas Central Business Lines Corporation (TCB) and U.S. Polyco, Inc. (USP) entered into agreements for the construction of a plant and infrastructure, leading to a dispute over cost responsibilities and contract interpretation. USP sued TCB for breach of contract, and TCB counterclaimed. The trial court partially granted USP's motion for summary judgment on contract interpretation, and a jury subsequently found TCB in material breach, awarding USP substantial damages. On appeal, the Tenth Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the judgment, finding that the trial court erred by interpreting an ambiguous contract provision as a matter of law and by instructing the jury based on that erroneous interpretation. The appellate court concluded that the contract provision was ambiguous, necessitating a remand for a new trial to determine the parties' true intent.

Contract DisputeBreach of ContractContract InterpretationSummary JudgmentJury InstructionRailroad Allowance AgreementTransload AgreementInfrastructure ImprovementsAmbiguity in ContractCanons of Construction

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Dell R. Cullum v. Dalene M. White and Diamond A. Ranch

Dell Cullum appealed a judgment from a trial court, which had awarded Dalene White actual damages, punitive damages, and a permanent injunction based on her libel claim. Cullum, a former employee of White's Diamond A Ranch, disseminated defamatory emails and created a website containing highly negative allegations against White and her business. The jury found in favor of White, awarding significant damages for mental anguish, damage to reputation, and exemplary damages. The appellate court, however, reversed the award of exemplary damages due to a non-unanimous jury verdict on the underlying libel claim and set aside the permanent injunction, citing an error in its imposition as a pretrial sanction. The judgment for actual damages for libel was affirmed in all other respects.

DefamationLibelExemplary DamagesPermanent InjunctionPretrial SanctionsFree SpeechTortious InterferenceEmotional DistressSufficiency of EvidenceAppellate Review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

May 08, 2007

Canal Carting, Inc. v. City of New York Business Integrity Commission

Petitioners Canal Carting, Inc. and Canal Sanitation, Inc., long-standing private sanitation businesses, challenged the Business Integrity Commission's (BIC) denial of their license renewals. The BIC cited Canal's knowing failure to provide required documentation, inability to demonstrate eligibility, and two violations for illegal dumping and operating an illegal transfer station. Canal argued the findings were arbitrary, capricious, and unprecedented, insisting their financial issues were unrelated to organized crime, which Local Law 42 (governing BIC) aimed to combat. The court found no due process violation regarding a formal hearing but concluded that the BIC's denial, effectively closing Canal's 50-year business for what amounted to poor business management, was arbitrary, unduly harsh, and shocking to one's sense of fairness. Consequently, the court granted the petition, annulled the BIC's denial, and remanded the case for reconsideration.

License RenewalAdministrative LawArticle 78 ProceedingBusiness Integrity CommissionTrade Waste IndustryDue ProcessArbitrary and CapriciousJudicial ReviewLocal Law 42Financial Responsibility

References

Case No. 13-04-358-CV, 13-04-224-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Montemayor v. Ortiz

This consolidated appeal involves a declaratory judgment action and counterclaims for damages. Appellants G. Xavier Montemayor and Franklin T. Graham Jr. sought to collect a 1990 judgment against Jose Antonio Ortiz Fernandez and Jose Antonio Ortiz Celada by claiming Becky Ortiz's business, Schor's, was community property subject to levy. They obtained an ex parte receivership, prompting Ortiz to file counterclaims for wrongful conduct including abuse of process, malicious prosecution, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court granted summary judgments for Ortiz, ruling the 1990 debt was contractual and Schor's was her special community property, not liable for Celada's debt. A jury awarded Ortiz actual and punitive damages on her counterclaims. On appeal, the court affirmed the summary judgments in favor of Ortiz, but reversed and rendered the judgment for damages, finding no legal sufficiency of evidence for any of Ortiz's tort claims, thereby also precluding punitive damages and mental anguish awards.

Declaratory JudgmentEx Parte ReceivershipCommunity PropertySpecial Community PropertyTortious ConductAbuse of ProcessMalicious ProsecutionDefamationIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressSummary Judgment Review

References

Case No. 08-11-00092-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 05, 2012

Business Staffing, Inc., Transglobal Indemnity Limited, Inc., Harry Sewill, Richard Gable Chapman, Bart Bogus, BSI Insurance Services, Inc., Transglobal Mortgage, Inc., and LHR Enterprises, Inc. v. Jackson Hot Oil Service D/B/A Jackson Brothers Hot Oil Service and Cody Jackson

This case involves an appeal from a final judgment against Business Staffing, Inc. (BSI) and related entities (Appellants) in favor of Jackson Hot Oil Service and individuals (Appellees). Appellees sued for breach of contract, DTPA violations, breach of good faith, negligence, and fraud, stemming from Appellants' alleged failure to provide workers' compensation insurance. The jury found Appellants engaged in unconscionable and deceptive acts and committed fraud, particularly against Cody Jackson, who suffered severe burns in an on-the-job accident. The appellate court affirmed most of the jury's findings, including those on statute of limitations, DTPA violations, and fraud, but reformed the judgment to adjust the calculation of damages under the DTPA and reflect a remittitur for Jackson Brothers.

Workers' Compensation FraudDeceptive Trade Practices ActInsurance MisrepresentationCivil ConspiracyBreach of ContractAppellate Court DecisionTexas Civil LawStatute of Limitations DefenseExemplary DamagesActual Damages

References

Showing 1-10 of 5,611 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

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

Beneficial Personnel Services of Texas, Inc. v. Rey

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

GAB Business Services, Inc. v. Moore

References

Case No. 01-14-00687-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 13, 2015

the Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Houston, Inc., the Better Business Bureau of Metropolitan Houston Education Foundation, Dan Parsons, Chris Church, Church Enterprises, Inc., Gary Milleson, Ronald N. McMillan, D' Artagnan Bebel, Mark Goldie, Cha v. John Moore Services, Inc. and John Moore Renovation, LLC

LitigationAttorney FeesCase ConsolidationAnti-SLAPP StatuteTexas Civil ProcedureAppellate PracticeJury TrialEvidence ObjectionsDiscovery DisputesLegal Fees Reasonableness

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Matthews v. Newspapers Inc.

DefamationLibelNewspaper LiabilityBusiness DamagesReputation DamagesAssumed Name CertificatePrivileged PublicationAppellate ReviewReversed and RemandedJury Question

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Nov 19, 2015

Schwarz v. Consolidated Edison, Inc.

Employment DiscriminationCriminal Conviction HistoryPerjury ConvictionWrongful TerminationHuman Rights LawCorrection Law Article 23-AReputational HarmNotorietyVacated ConvictionsMotion to Dismiss

References

Case No. 10-19-00004-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 27, 2022

Texas Central Business Lines Corporation v. U.S. Polyco, Inc.

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Dell R. Cullum v. Dalene M. White and Diamond A. Ranch

DefamationLibelExemplary DamagesPermanent InjunctionPretrial SanctionsFree SpeechTortious InterferenceEmotional DistressSufficiency of EvidenceAppellate Review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

May 08, 2007

Canal Carting, Inc. v. City of New York Business Integrity Commission

License RenewalAdministrative LawArticle 78 ProceedingBusiness Integrity CommissionTrade Waste IndustryDue ProcessArbitrary and CapriciousJudicial ReviewLocal Law 42Financial Responsibility

References

Case No. 13-04-358-CV, 13-04-224-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Montemayor v. Ortiz

References

Case No. 08-11-00092-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 05, 2012

Business Staffing, Inc., Transglobal Indemnity Limited, Inc., Harry Sewill, Richard Gable Chapman, Bart Bogus, BSI Insurance Services, Inc., Transglobal Mortgage, Inc., and LHR Enterprises, Inc. v. Jackson Hot Oil Service D/B/A Jackson Brothers Hot Oil Service and Cody Jackson

References

Showing 1-10 of 5,611 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.