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. 08-17-00182-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 14, 2019

Jodi Strobach v. WesTex Community Credit Union

Jodi Strobach appealed a summary judgment dismissing her lawsuit against WesTex Community Credit Union. Strobach claimed breach of contract, negligence, fraud, and deceptive trade practices after WesTex released funds from her account based on a garnishment judgment against her father, not her, and without proper notice to Strobach. The appellate court agreed that a question of fact remained regarding whether WesTex breached its contractual duty of ordinary care to Strobach. However, the court affirmed the summary judgment on Strobach's claims of negligence, fraud, and violations of the DTPA, citing the economic loss rule and lack of evidence for fraud.

GarnishmentSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractNegligenceFraudDeceptive Trade Practices ActDue ProcessNoticeVoid JudgmentOrdinary Care
References
115
Case No. 01-22-00712-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 2024

Ernest Polk v. Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner

Ernest Polk, a Financial Examiner I, was terminated by the Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner (OCCC) for alleged misuse of his state credit card. Polk sued OCCC for race discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment, claiming his promotion was delayed and termination was retaliatory after he reported racial discrimination. The trial court granted OCCC's Plea to the Jurisdiction, dismissing his claims. The appellate court affirmed, finding Polk failed to establish a causal link or pretext for his retaliation claim, did not exhaust administrative remedies for his race discrimination termination claim, and the alleged harassment was not severe or pervasive enough for a hostile work environment claim.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationRace DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentSovereign ImmunityAdministrative RemediesPlea to the JurisdictionCredit Card MisuseFailure to PromotePrima Facie Case
References
68
Case No. 14-05-00845-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2007

Nova Information Systems Inc. v. Nidhi and Roneil Inc. D/B/A PIC N PAC

Appellee Nidhi and Roneil, Inc. entered a contract with Nova Information Systems, Inc. and Brian Sowada for credit card processing for their convenience store. Appellants failed to properly program the credit card machines, leading to appellee's funds being routed to a third party and a loss of $4,938.83 in credit card charges. This material breach forced the closure of the store and resulted in a $20,000 loss on their initial investment of $120,000. The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the appellee. On appeal, appellants challenged the trial court's denial of their motion to compel arbitration and the sufficiency of the evidence for the damages awarded. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's final judgment, ruling that appellants waived their right to compel arbitration and that sufficient evidence supported the damages.

breach of contractarbitration waiverlegal sufficiency of evidencefactual sufficiency of evidencedamages awardcredit card processing disputeloss of investmentTexas Court of Appealsbusiness disputejudgment affirmation
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Credit One Financial v. Anderson (In re Anderson)

Plaintiff Orrin Anderson, a debtor, had his credit card debt with Credit One discharged in bankruptcy, but the debt remained on his credit report as 'charged off.' Anderson reopened his bankruptcy case and filed a class action complaint against Credit One for alleged violations of the discharge injunction. Credit One moved to compel arbitration, strike class allegations, and dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which the Bankruptcy Court denied. Credit One appealed the denial to compel arbitration as of right and sought leave to appeal the denials to strike class allegations and dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The District Court denied Credit One's motion for leave to appeal, finding no basis for pendent appellate jurisdiction or interlocutory appeal for the additional issues.

Bankruptcy Discharge InjunctionClass Action WaiverSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealPendent Appellate JurisdictionArbitration AgreementFederal Statutory ClaimsContempt PowerPunitive DamagesInjunctive Relief
References
49
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00187 [179 AD3d 1228]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2020

Matter of Reardon v. Global Cash Card, Inc.

The case, Matter of Reardon v Global Cash Card, Inc., involves an appeal concerning the validity of 12 NYCRR part 192, regulations governing wage payment methods, including payroll debit cards, adopted by the Commissioner of Labor. Global Cash Card, Inc., a payroll debit card service provider, challenged these regulations, leading to their revocation by the Industrial Board of Appeals (IBA). The Commissioner then successfully petitioned the Supreme Court to annul the IBA's determination. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, concluding that the Commissioner acted within her delegated legislative authority in promulgating the regulations, despite modifying the order to strike certain extraneous proof.

Labor LawWage PaymentPayroll Debit CardsAdministrative RegulationsRule-making AuthorityIndustrial Board of Appeals (IBA)CPLR Article 78Appellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationCommissioner of Labor
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.

Alvin S. McFarland appealed the trial court's decision to grant Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.'s motion for summary judgment in a credit card debt collection suit and deny McFarland's cross-motion. Citibank sued McFarland for unpaid credit card debt based on an "account stated" cause of action, among other claims. McFarland challenged the competency of Citibank's affidavit evidence and argued that "account stated" was not applicable to credit card collections. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the affidavit competent and confirming that an "account stated" cause of action is appropriate for credit card debt collection in Texas.

Credit card debtSummary judgmentAccount statedAppellate reviewAffidavit competencyBusiness records exceptionPersonal knowledgeImplied contractTexas civil procedureDebt collection law
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Universal Card Services Corp. v. Akins (In Re Akins)

The Plaintiff initiated an adversary proceeding against the Defendant to determine the non-dischargeability of a debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), alleging fraud. The Defendant had used an unsolicited $4,000 credit check from the Plaintiff after disclosing to the Plaintiff's representative that she needed to pay bills. The Plaintiff relied solely on the Defendant's FICO score, which was found to be inaccurate due to other creditors not reporting maxed-out credit lines. The Court found no false representation or intent to defraud by the Defendant, and no reliance by the Plaintiff. The Court concluded that the Plaintiff's lending practices were negligent and the credit reporting system was flawed. The debt was determined to be dischargeable. Furthermore, the Court awarded attorney's fees to the Defendant under 11 U.S.C. § 523(b), finding that the Plaintiff's position was not substantially justified due to their insufficient pre-filing investigation.

Bankruptcy DischargeNon-Dischargeability ActionCredit Card DebtFraudulent IntentReliance DoctrineAttorneys' Fees AwardSubstantially Justified PositionConsumer ProtectionCredit Reporting FlawsUnsolicited Credit Offers
References
17
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 04295 [172 AD3d 655]
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2019

Capital Bus. Credit LLC v. Tailgate Clothing Co., Corp.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Supreme Court order regarding a dispute between Capital Business Credit LLC (plaintiff) and Tailgate Clothing Company, Corp. (defendant). Plaintiff purchased accounts receivable from a nonparty related to clothing manufacturing. Defendant paid some invoices but left 12 outstanding. Defendant claimed an equitable recoupment credit for payments made to the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC) for severance pay to Honduran workers, which became due after the manufacturer violated local law by not paying severance. The Court found issues of fact precluding summary judgment on the account stated claim and correctly sustained the equitable recoupment defense, noting it was based on transactions linked to the defendant's licensing and manufacturing agreements. The court also rejected plaintiff's waiver and estoppel arguments.

Equitable recoupmentAccount stated claimSummary judgmentAccounts receivableBreach of contractTimeliness of objectionLicensing agreementManufacturing agreementHonduran labor lawSeverance pay
References
6
Case No. 10-07-00277-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 2009

Alvin S. McFarland v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.

Alvin S. McFarland appealed the trial court's judgment in a credit card debt collection suit initiated by Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. McFarland challenged the lower court's decision to grant summary judgment to Citibank and deny his cross-motion, raising concerns about the evidentiary sufficiency of Citibank's affidavit and the applicability of an "account stated" claim to credit card debts. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, ruling that McFarland failed to preserve his objections to the affidavit's form and that the affidavit was not conclusory. Furthermore, the court held that an implied agreement could be established through the parties' conduct and that the "account stated" cause of action is appropriate for credit card collection cases in Texas. Thus, the court concluded that Citibank had established its right to judgment as a matter of law.

Credit Card DebtSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewAccount StatedBreach of ContractAffidavit SufficiencyEvidentiary ObjectionsImplied AgreementTexas Court of AppealsCivil Procedure
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zellermaier v. Travelers Indemnity Co.

Plaintiff Zellermaier, CEO of General Credit Corporation, initiated an action against Travelers, seeking $10,000,000 in damages for allegedly false statements made in a report to the New York State Insurance Department’s Frauds Bureau. This report concerned a suspected fraudulent claim for 13 stolen tractor trailers insured by Travelers, where General Credit had a security interest. Travelers moved for summary judgment, asserting protection under Insurance Law § 406, which provides civil liability immunity for reports of suspected insurance fraud, and arguing the action was barred by CPLR 215’s one-year statute of limitations. The court found no evidence of fraud or bad faith on Travelers' part. Consequently, the court granted Travelers’ cross motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint, and denied Zellermaier's motion to amend his complaint, affirming the statutory immunity and application of the statute of limitations. The court also noted that the case was barred by res judicata due to privity with a prior action.

Insurance FraudStatutory ImmunityInsurance Law § 406CPLR 215Summary JudgmentNegligent MisrepresentationFraudulent Insurance TransactionsWorkers' Compensation FraudRes JudicataStatute of Limitations
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 2,515 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