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

Legleu v. Clarksville Department of Electricity

Plaintiff Miranda Legleu sued Clarksville Department of Electricity for personal injuries. The defendant moved to dismiss, asserting it lacked capacity to be sued as it was a non-entity of the City of Clarksville. Legleu moved to amend her complaint to add the City of Clarksville as the real party in interest. The trial court denied the dismissal and granted the amendment. On appeal, the Court evaluated whether the amendment adding the City of Clarksville could relate back, considering that the City of Clarksville did not receive notice of the suit before the statute of limitations expired. Citing Duke v. Replogle Enterprises, the appellate court held that for an amendment to relate back, the new party must receive notice within the limitations period. Since there was no evidence the City of Clarksville had notice prior to the statute of limitations running, the trial court's order was vacated, and Legleu's suit was dismissed.

Personal InjuryMotion to DismissAmendment of ComplaintReal Party in InterestMisnomerStatute of LimitationsRelation Back DoctrineNotice RequirementCapacity to SueMunicipal Entity
References
12
Case No. 01-A-01-9702-CH-00056; 90-66-204
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 27, 1997

Ogburn v. The Gas & Water Dept., City of Clarksville

A meter reader, Roy Dean Ogburn, sued the City of Clarksville and its Gas and Water Department after he was fired following a dog attack and subsequent back injury. A jury initially found the defendants liable for handicap discrimination and for depriving Ogburn of his due process right to a pre-termination hearing, awarding him $450,000 in damages. On appeal, the court reversed the jury verdict on the due process claim, concluding that Ogburn, as an employee at will, did not have a constitutionally protected property interest in his employment, despite the city charter's appeals procedure. However, the appellate court affirmed the jury's finding of handicap discrimination, stating there was sufficient evidence that Ogburn was capable of performing his duties. The case was remanded to the trial court for a new trial on damages alone, as the original award did not differentiate between the two claims, and for reconsideration of attorney fees in light of the altered liability.

Handicap discriminationDue processEmployment at willWrongful terminationCompensatory damagesAttorney feesRemandAppealJury verdictMunicipal employment
References
18
Case No. M2013-01465-SC-R11-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 18, 2015

Richard Moreno v. City of Clarksville

Richard Moreno sued the City of Clarksville after an accident caused by a falling tree, seeking to toll the statute of limitations under Tennessee Code Annotated § 20-1-119 (comparative fault) and § 9-8-402(b) (Claims Commission Act tolling). The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding the 90-day window was not triggered. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the initial written notice of claim constituted an "original complaint." The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, concluding that the written notice is not an "original complaint" under § 20-1-119 and that § 9-8-402(b) does not apply to toll the statute of limitations for claims against municipalities under the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA). Consequently, Moreno's action against the City of Clarksville was deemed time-barred.

Statute of LimitationsComparative FaultGovernmental Tort Liability ActClaims Commission ActMunicipal LiabilityTolling ProvisionPleadingsOriginal ComplaintNotice of ClaimStatutory Interpretation
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 12, 1994

Conatser v. Clarksville Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

Eric Conatser, an employee of The Clarksville Coca-Cola Bottling Company, sustained a work-related injury and was subsequently terminated three days after returning to work. Conatser filed a suit for retaliatory discharge, alleging his termination was due to his workers' compensation claim. Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals granted a directed verdict in favor of the employer, finding no prima facie case of retaliation. The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed these decisions, ruling that proximity in time between a workers' compensation claim and termination, without additional evidence of satisfactory job performance, is insufficient to establish a causal link for retaliatory discharge. The Court found no material evidence that the workers' compensation claim was a substantial factor in the employer's decision to terminate employment.

Retaliatory dischargeWorkers' compensationDirected verdictPrima facie caseEmployment-at-willCausal relationshipBurden of proofJob performanceAppellate reviewWrongful termination
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 1984

Moore Construction Co. v. Clarksville Department of Electricity

This case concerns a contractor's claim for delay damages arising from the construction of an office building and warehouse for the Clarksville Department of Electricity. Moore Construction Company sued the Department, Kennon Construction Company (a co-prime contractor), and Cincinnati Insurance Company (Kennon's bonding company), alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and third-party beneficiary claims. The trial court awarded Moore Construction Company $2,719.75 for extra work but denied delay damages, citing a lack of a written change order. On appeal, the court affirmed the award for extra work and modified the judgment to include an additional $8,986.08 in delay damages. The appellate court ruled that the Department's conduct waived the written change order requirement, and that Moore was an intended third-party beneficiary of the contract between Kennon and the Department, allowing recovery for certain increased supervisory, overhead, and equipment-related costs resulting from the delay.

Construction LawContract BreachDelay DamagesThird-Party BeneficiaryWaiver of Contract TermsConstruction ProjectPrime ContractorsSurety BondsOverhead CostsLabor Costs
References
40
Case No. M2017-02492-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2018

LaSonya Robertson v. Clarksville-Montgomery County School System

This slip-and-fall case involves LaSonya Robertson, a middle school teacher, who sued the Clarksville-Montgomery County School System after falling on a wet floor. She alleged negligence by custodians who inadequately placed wet-floor signs. The trial court initially found the school district 75% negligent and Ms. Robertson 25% at fault, awarding her $180,000. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the finding of the school district's negligence and denial of immunity under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act. However, the appellate court reversed the allocation of comparative fault to Ms. Robertson, determining the school district was 100% at fault, and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Slip-and-fallPremises liabilityGovernmental tort liabilityComparative faultNegligenceWet floorSchool districtTeacher injuryAppellate reviewOperational decision
References
17
Case No. 2019-06-0276
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 16, 2019

Campbell, Michael v. Clarksville Holdings, Inc dba Tennova Healthcare Clarksville

Michael Campbell, a nurse, sought medical and temporary disability benefits for a low-back injury he allegedly suffered while working at Tennova Healthcare-Clarksville. The court found that Tennova received timely notice of the new injury and that Mr. Campbell provided sufficient evidence to be entitled to additional medical benefits. Due to Tennova's failure to offer a panel of physicians, Dr. William DeVries was designated as the authorized treating physician. However, Mr. Campbell's requests for payment of past medical expenses, mileage, and temporary disability benefits were denied as premature. The case was also referred to the Compliance Unit to consider the imposition of penalties against Tennova for potential violations of claims handling standards.

Low Back InjuryMedical Benefits GrantExpedited HearingNotice DefenseMedical CausationPanel of PhysiciansEmployer Compliance ViolationsLumbar RadiculitisOrthopedic TreatmentPre-existing Condition
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 02, 1983

Mosley v. Clarksville Memorial Hospital

Donnell R. Mosley, along with other present and former employees of Clarksville Memorial Hospital, filed a class-action lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in employment practices under Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and other sections of 42 U.S.C. The court certified a limited class and proceeded to trial. The court found no class-wide discrimination under the disparate impact theory based on statistical evidence. It also denied the claims of individual plaintiffs Nora Merriweather, Edith Poindexter, Sarah Jordan, Janice Bowen, and Ceresa Graves under the disparate treatment theory due to various reasons, including remedied discrimination, lack of standing, rejection of job offers, or lack of qualifications. However, the court found that Clarksville Memorial Hospital discriminated against Donnell R. Mosley by refusing to transfer him to a clerk's position due to his race, in violation of Title VII and a previous conciliation agreement. The court awarded Mosley backpay of $16,014.00 and front pay for six months in lieu of reinstatement, and also ordered the defendant to pay attorney fees and costs. The claims under Title VI were also dismissed due to lack of standing.

Racial DiscriminationEmployment DiscriminationClass ActionDisparate TreatmentDisparate ImpactTitle VIICivil Rights ActBackpay AwardFront Pay AwardConciliation Agreement
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Harrison v. City of Clarksville, Tenn.

This case addresses the City of Clarksville's motion for summary judgment against 34 firefighter plaintiffs concerning the exclusion of meal and sleep periods from compensable time. The core issue under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) was whether these employees, hired after the compensation policy began, impliedly agreed to the exclusion. The Court previously upheld the City's actions under Tennessee law and the validity of the extended shifts. This memorandum finds that most plaintiffs' delayed objections, and all plaintiffs' continued employment and acceptance of pay, constituted an implied agreement to the existing terms. Consequently, the Court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment against all designated plaintiffs.

Summary JudgmentFair Labor Standards ActFirefighters CompensationMeal and Sleep Time ExclusionImplied AgreementEmployment LawWage and Hour DisputePublic Sector EmploymentLabor DisputeEmployee Grievances
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Prost v. City of Clarksville, Police Dept.

The plaintiff, a 54-year-old law enforcement officer, suffered a back injury in 1982 while on duty, leading to a herniated disc. Despite surgery and a 15% medical disability, the trial court found him permanently and totally disabled. The defendant, City of Clarksville Police Department, appealed. The Supreme Court of Tennessee reversed the trial court's finding, concluding that the plaintiff was not totally incapacitated from all income-producing occupations, as he could perform other police duties. The case was remanded for a determination of permanent partial disability benefits, emphasizing consideration of both medical and non-medical factors like skills and job opportunities.

Worker's CompensationPermanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityBack InjuryHerniated DiscMedical EvidenceEmployabilityIncome-Producing OccupationJudicial ReviewRemand
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 17 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