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. 13-99-271-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2002

West, Randy and Antonia West v. Maintenance Tool and Supply Co., Inc. and Rene Rodriguez, Individually and as Representative of Maintenance Tool and Supply Co., Inc.

The appellants, Randy and Antonia West, appealed a default summary judgment granted in favor of appellees, Maintenance Tool & Supply Co., Inc. and Rene Rodriguez. The claims at issue were workers' compensation retaliation and defamation, along with sanctions imposed against West's counsel. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment on the retaliation claim, finding that Maintenance Tool & Supply Co. established a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for West's termination and that West had adequate notice of the hearing. The defamation claim was also affirmed for summary judgment due to judicial proceeding privilege. However, the court reversed the order imposing sanctions, ruling that the trial court abused its discretion by not providing notice and an evidentiary hearing as required by procedural rules before imposing sanctions.

Summary judgmentWorkers' compensation retaliationDefamationRule 13 sanctionsAbuse of discretionNotice of hearingMotion for new trialCausation employment lawJudicial proceeding privilegeAttorney conduct
References
35
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 00372 [168 AD3d 536]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 22, 2019

Malik v. Style Mgt. Co. Inc.

Plaintiff Karam Malik sustained personal injuries after slipping on ice on a roadway between two buildings. The ice allegedly formed from water discharged from a hose attached to a building owned by 514 West 44th Street, Inc., and used by Style Management Co., Inc., a taxi company operating from the same building. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to 514 West 44th Street, Inc., but the Appellate Division reversed this decision. The Appellate Division found that 514 West failed to establish its entitlement to summary judgment as it did not conclusively prove it was an out-of-possession landlord, and genuine issues of fact existed regarding its potential liability for creating the dangerous condition given its close connection with Style Management Co., Inc.

Slip and FallIce AccumulationPremises LiabilityLandowner DutySummary Judgment MotionAppellate ReversalCorporate Alter EgoProximate CauseDangerous ConditionPublic Sidewalk Liability
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

West v. Vought Aircraft Industries, Inc.

This Tennessee Supreme Court opinion consolidates two workers' compensation appeals, West v. Vought Aircraft Industries, Inc. and Thompson v. Peterbilt Motor Co., to clarify when a lawsuit becomes 'pending' for the prior suit pending doctrine. The court ruled that an action is 'pending' from the moment the complaint is filed, provided personal jurisdiction is later acquired. Applying this, Vought's lawsuit in Davidson County was deemed to have priority over West's in Smith County, leading to the remand of West's case for dismissal. Thompson's appeal was dismissed as moot because the underlying Davidson County case had already reached a final judgment. The court also highlighted concerns regarding the 'race to the courthouse' phenomenon in workers' compensation litigation, suggesting legislative reform.

Prior Suit Pending DoctrineJurisdictionComplaint FilingService of ProcessMootnessConsolidated AppealsJudicial ProcedureAppellate ProcedureStatutory InterpretationForum Selection
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 30, 1979

West Texas Utilities Co. v. Texas Electric Service Co.

This case involves an antitrust dispute between intrastate Texas electric utility companies. Plaintiffs, West Texas Utilities Company (WTU) and Central Power & Light (CPL), subsidiaries of Central and South West Corporation (CSW), sued Texas Electric Service Co. (TESCO) and Houston Lighting and Power (HLP), alleging a conspiracy to restrict the transmission of electric power in intrastate commerce in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The defendants argued their intrastate operations were permitted by federal law and lacked anticompetitive intent. The court found no evidence of an anticompetitive purpose or effect in the defendants' actions, affirming that operating intrastate was a lawful choice. Consequently, the court denied the plaintiffs' antitrust claims and request for injunctive relief. Additionally, HLP's counterclaim against CPL was granted, resulting in a permanent injunction against CPL regarding power transmission from the South Texas Project.

Antitrust LawSherman Act Section 1Electric Utility RegulationInterstate vs Intrastate CommerceMarket DefinitionGroup BoycottRule of Reason AnalysisUtility InterconnectionPublic Utility Holding Company ActSouth Texas Project
References
56
Case No. E2004-00422-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 30, 2004

Jeffrey Scott West v. Sharon Ann West

Jeffrey Scott West (Father) filed a petition to modify the parties' Permanent Parenting Plan, seeking to require Sharon Ann West (Mother) to pay child support. The trial court found a substantial and material change in circumstances due to Mother having a two-year gross income exceeding $25,000, ordering her to pay $290 per month in child support. Mother appealed, arguing errors in the child support order and its calculation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the circumstances justifying the original downward deviation in child support had changed and that child support is based on all income sources. The court also declined to address issues not raised at the trial court level.

Child support modificationPermanent Parenting PlanMaterial change in circumstancesIncome calculationMarital property distributionDisability and child supportAppellate review of family lawFinancial circumstancesMedical evidenceSpousal support as income
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mustang Pipeline Co. v. Driver Pipeline Co.

This case concerns a breach of contract dispute between Mustang Pipeline Co. (Mustang) and Driver Pipeline Co. (Driver) regarding a pipeline construction project. Mustang sued Driver for failing to complete work timely, while Driver counterclaimed for wrongful termination. The jury initially found both parties breached, but the Supreme Court of Texas clarified that an express jury finding on materiality is not required when 'time is of the essence,' determining Driver's breach was material as a matter of law. This discharged Mustang from its obligations, invalidating the wrongful termination claim. However, Mustang failed to provide sufficient evidence that its claimed damages were reasonable and necessary. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court's judgment for Driver, rendered judgment that Driver take nothing, and reversed the award of attorney's fees to Driver, upholding the denial of damages to Mustang.

Breach of ContractMaterial BreachTime is of the EssenceWrongful TerminationContract DamagesReasonableness of CostsAttorney's FeesJury InstructionsAffirmative DefenseJudgment Notwithstanding Verdict
References
12
Case No. 07-05-0386-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 17, 2007

Yorkshire Insurance Co. v. Diatom Drilling Co.

Insurers (Yorkshire Insurance Co., Ltd. and Ocean Marine Insurance Co., Ltd.) appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Diatom Drilling Co. and Employer’s Contractor Services, Inc. Insurers sought declaratory relief regarding a CGL policy's exclusion of liability for injury or death to "leased-in employees/workers." The case stems from a 1992 accident where Randall Jay Seger, an employee leased by ECS to Diatom, was killed. The appellate court found that the "Excluding Leased-In Employees/Workers" condition unambiguously excludes claims against Diatom/ECS related to such workers. The court reversed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Diatom and ECS and rendered summary judgment for the Insurers, declaring the exclusion valid. The award of attorney's fees to Diatom and ECS was also reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

Insurance policyDeclaratory judgmentSummary judgmentCGL policyLeased employeesWorker injuryCoverage disputePolicy exclusionAttorney's feesAppellate review
References
14
Case No. NO. 01-14-00350-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 14, 2015

Thurman H. West v. Gwendolyn Meshalle West

Thurman H. West (Appellant) appealed the trial court's final decree in his divorce from Gwendolyn Meshalle West (Appellee). Thurman challenged the trial court's findings of intentional underemployment and child support obligations, characterization and distribution of marital property (specifically a house and certain bank accounts), and the award of Gwendolyn's attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's child support calculation, finding sufficient evidence of Thurman's net resources from salary, gifts, and allowances. It also affirmed the characterization of bank account funds as community property, as the church 'gifts' were considered income. However, the court reversed the trial court's characterization of the house as community property, ruling that Thurman's 2007 deed conveying his interest to the church became operative once Gwendolyn's homestead interest was divested by the divorce decree, thus removing it from the community estate. Additionally, the appellate court reversed the award of attorney's fees due to legally insufficient evidence of reasonableness. The case was remanded for a new division of the community estate and a redetermination of attorney's fees.

DivorceChild SupportProperty DivisionMarital EstateCommunity PropertySeparate PropertyHomesteadAttorney's FeesIntentional UnderemploymentTexas Family Law
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

West v. MAINTENANCE TOOL & SUPPLY CO., INC.

Randy and Antonia West appealed a default summary judgment granted to Maintenance Tool & Supply Company, Inc. and Rene Rodriguez (MT) on claims of workers' compensation retaliation and defamation. The trial court also imposed $21,095.00 in sanctions against West's counsel. The appellate court addressed issues regarding notice of the summary judgment hearing, denial of a new trial, the merits of the summary judgment on retaliation and defamation claims, and the sanctions order. The court affirmed the summary judgment on the retaliation and defamation claims, finding West had sufficient notice and failed to establish a causal link for retaliation or overcome the judicial privilege for defamation. However, the appellate court reversed the sanctions order against West's counsel due to the lack of an evidentiary hearing and failure to establish bad faith or harassment.

Summary JudgmentDefault JudgmentWorkers' Compensation RetaliationDefamationRule 13 SanctionsMotion for New TrialAdequate NoticeCausationJudicial Proceeding PrivilegeAbuse of Discretion
References
43
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

West American Insurance Co. v. Montgomery

This is the second appeal of a workers' compensation case involving Willie Montgomery and West American Insurance Company. The initial judgment awarded Montgomery 75% permanent partial disability, temporary total disability, and medical expenses. West American appealed this judgment, which was affirmed. Subsequently, a dispute arose over the calculation of interest on the judgment, specifically concerning unaccrued permanent partial disability benefits and unpaid medical benefits. The trial court granted West American's motion to quash execution on the bond, ruling they were not liable for interest on these specific amounts under T.C.A. § 50-6-225(h). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, clarifying that workers' compensation law does not entitle an employee to interest on payments not yet due or on medical benefits paid directly to providers, consistent with T.C.A. § 50-6-204 and § 50-6-225(h).

Workers' CompensationInterest CalculationMedical BenefitsPermanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityStatutory InterpretationTennessee LawAppellate ReviewUnaccrued BenefitsJudgment Enforcement
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 6,868 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