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. 01-05-00838-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 31, 2007

Craig Thomas, Karen Thomas, Kaitlin Thomas and Caroline Thomas v. CNC Investments, L.L.P.

This case involves an appeal by Craig Thomas and his family (Appellants) against CNC Investments, L.L.P. (Appellee) following a summary judgment in favor of CNC. Deputy Craig Thomas was injured while assisting another deputy hired by CNC for security at an apartment complex; he was shot by the other deputy and run over by a suspect in a stolen vehicle. The Appellants sued CNC for vicarious liability for assault, premises liability, and negligent hiring. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's summary judgment, ruling that the other deputy was acting as a public-safety officer, the "firefighter's rule" barred premises liability claims, and the negligent hiring claim lacked sufficient evidence.

Summary JudgmentVicarious LiabilityPremises LiabilityNegligent HiringFirefighter's RulePublic Safety OfficerOff-Duty OfficerRespondeat SuperiorLicensee DutyForeseeability
References
57
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network Service L.L.C. v. Ray Aguilar

Ray Aguilar sued his employers, Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network Service, L.L.C., for wrongful termination in violation of the Texas Labor Code Chapter 451, alleging retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim after a workplace injury. Aguilar claimed a hostile work environment, denial of a pay raise, and being pressured into unpaid FMLA leave, leading to his termination for 'job abandonment' without proper notice. A jury found in Aguilar's favor, awarding actual and punitive damages. The appellate court affirmed the findings of retaliation and constructive discharge, concluding there was sufficient evidence that the employers failed to uniformly enforce their absence control policy and showed a causal link between the claim and termination. However, the court reversed the punitive damages award, finding insufficient evidence of actual malice.

Retaliatory DischargeEmployment DiscriminationTexas Labor Code Chapter 451Absence Control PolicyConstructive TerminationFamily Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Exemplary DamagesLegal SufficiencyFactual SufficiencyAppellate Review
References
42
Case No. 08-10-00328-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 17, 2012

Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network Service L.L.C. v. Ray Aguilar

Ray Aguilar, a former employee, sued Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network, L.L.C. for wrongful termination under the Texas Labor Code Chapter 451, alleging retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim. A jury found in Aguilar's favor, awarding actual and exemplary damages. On appeal, the Eighth District Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the jury's findings regarding the employer's failure to uniformly enforce its absence control policy, the presence of retaliatory discharge, and constructive termination. However, the court reversed the award of exemplary damages, concluding there was insufficient evidence of actual malice.

Workers' CompensationRetaliatory DischargeAbsence Control PolicyConstructive TerminationExemplary DamagesTexas Labor CodeFMLAJury VerdictAppellate ReviewEmployment Law
References
42
Case No. 09-23-00047-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 27, 2024

Dockside Marine, L.L.C. v. Joshua Walker, Bryan Brown, and HTX Watersports, L.L.C.

Dockside Marine, L.L.C. appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Joshua Walker, Bryan Brown, and HTX Watersports, L.L.C. Dockside's claims included theft, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with contract, and civil conspiracy, stemming from allegations that Walker, their former General Manager, diverted business and employees to a new competing dealership, HTX. The Court of Appeals partially reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact for theft and conversion claims against all appellees, and for breach of fiduciary duty against Walker. However, the court affirmed the summary judgment for knowing participation in breach of fiduciary duty against Brown and HTX, and for tortious interference and civil conspiracy against all appellees. This affirmation was based on Dockside's failure to present sufficient evidence regarding a "meeting of the minds" or direct interference for these specific claims.

theftconversionbreach of fiduciary dutytortious interferencecivil conspiracysummary judgmentat-will employmentboat dealership disputecontract disputeappellate review
References
39
Case No. 01-15-00733-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 18, 2016

in the Interest of D.R.L., C.L.W., Jr., and A.E.L., Children

Margarita Luna and Jason McDonald appealed a trial court order terminating their parental rights to D.R.L., C.L.W., Jr., and A.E.L. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) initiated the termination based on allegations of Luna's physical abuse, neglectful supervision, and physical neglect, alongside her history of drug abuse and non-compliance with her family service plan. McDonald's rights were terminated due to his failure to respond to citation and assert paternity for D.R.L. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support the termination of Luna's parental rights was in the children's best interest. It also upheld McDonald's termination under Texas Family Code section 161.002(b)(1), which does not require a best interest finding for an alleged father who fails to respond to citation.

Parental Rights TerminationChild WelfareDrug AbuseNeglectPhysical AbuseFamily LawBest Interest of ChildAppellate ReviewDue ProcessConstitutional Challenge
References
48
Case No. 04-22-00232-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 2024

Champion Food Service, Inc. and Champion Food Service 2, Inc. (Cross-Appellee) v. ProAlamo Foods, L.L.C. and ProCoastal, L.L.C. (Cross-Appellant)

Champion Food Service, Inc. and Champion Food Service 2, Inc. (Champion) appealed a final judgment in favor of ProAlamo Foods, L.L.C. and ProCoastal, L.L.C. (Pro Parties) after a jury trial. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order awarding additional post-verdict attorneys' fees to the Pro Parties, finding the re-opening of evidence impermissible. However, the court affirmed the judgment for the Pro Parties on their quantum meruit claim, including attorneys' fees (excluding the reversed post-verdict award). Champion's claims for DTPA violations and breach of implied warranty were denied due to insufficient evidence. The court upheld the trial court's evidentiary rulings regarding frozen meat products and text messages.

Quantum MeruitAttorneys' FeesDirected VerdictBreach of ContractImplied WarrantyDTPAAppellate ReviewJury VerdictPost-Verdict FeesFood Distribution
References
48
Case No. 13-13-00331-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2014

Raul Flores, Inc. v. Adrian D. Rodriguez and L & F Distributors, L. L. C.

In this Texas Court of Appeals case, Raul Flores, Inc. (Flores) appealed the trial court's decision in a commercial property damage dispute against Adrian D. Rodriguez and L&F Distributors, L.L.C. (L&F). Flores claimed damages to its car wash canopy and concrete pavement caused by L&F's trucks. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's directed verdict on pavement damage claims due to insufficient causation evidence and the proper exclusion of Flores's expert testimony as unreliable. The court also found no reversible error in the exclusion of lay causation testimony and upheld the directed verdict on exemplary and vicarious liability claims related to the pavement.

Commercial Property DamageDirected VerdictExpert WitnessLay WitnessCausationAppellate ReviewTexas LawEvidence AdmissibilityNegligenceGross Negligence
References
28
Case No. 13-06-471-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2008

Day Cruises Maritime, L.L.C. and Corpus Christi Day Cruise, L.L.C. v. Christus Spohn Health System D/B/A Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial

This case involves an appeal from summary judgments. Appellants (Day Cruises Maritime, L.L.C. and Corpus Christi Day Cruise, L.L.C., collectively "Texas Treasure") contested the trial court's decision in favor of appellee (Christus Spohn Health System d/b/a Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial, "Christus"). The dispute arose from medical expenses incurred by a seaman, Judy Ann Lanado, employed by Texas Treasure, who suffered severe brain damage after surgery at Christus. Texas Treasure sought to avoid liability for the entire hospital bill and claimed equitable subrogation. The appellate court affirmed the denial of Texas Treasure's motion for summary judgment on its plea in intervention but reversed the granting of Christus's motions for summary judgment on its counterclaim and Texas Treasure's plea in intervention, remanding for further proceedings to determine negligence and attributable expenses.

Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewSworn AccountVerified DenialDue ProcessEquitable SubrogationMaintenance and CureMaritime LawAlien CrewmanHospital Expenses
References
52
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Carlineo v. Snelling & Snelling, LLC

The claimant, a laborer, sustained work-related leg injuries and filed a workers' compensation claim. The core issue was determining the responsible employer between Snelling & Snelling, LLC (general employer) and F.T. Well Support (special employer). After initial hearings, the Workers' Compensation Board ruled that F.T. Well Support was the sole special employer and Snelling & Snelling, LLC was 100% liable. Snelling appealed, alleging they were denied a full opportunity to present evidence and challenging the sole liability determination. The Court found no error, concluding that Snelling had a fair chance to develop the record and that substantial evidence supported the Board's findings regarding F.T. Well Support as the exclusive special employer and Snelling's sole liability. Consequently, the Board's decision was affirmed.

Workers' CompensationGeneral EmploymentSpecial EmploymentEmployer LiabilityTemporary Employment AgencyAppellate ReviewRemandEvidentiary HearingsWaiverSubstantial Evidence
References
6
Case No. 12-14-00254-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 2015

Neurodiagnostic Tex, L.L.C. v. Robert Josh Pierce and Synergy IOM, LLC

Neurodiagnostic Tex, L.L.C. (Appellant) sued Robert "Josh" Pierce, a former employee, and Synergy IOM, L.L.C. (Appellee) for tortious interference with Pierce's covenant not to compete. Pierce, an IOM technician, left Neurodiagnostic after eight years to work for Synergy. Appellant alleged that the noncompete agreement was violated and sought damages. Synergy argued the covenant was unenforceable due to unreasonable restraints (time, geographic area, scope of activity) and lack of a protectable interest, such as confidential information or specialized training. Synergy also contended that Appellant failed to prove actual damages or interference. The trial court's judgment in favor of Synergy is being appealed, with Synergy requesting its affirmation.

Noncompete covenantTortious interferenceEmployment agreementIntraoperative neurophysiologic monitoringIOM technicianTrade secretsConfidential informationGeographic restraintsDuration restraintsSummary judgment
References
83
Showing 1-10 of 1,962 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