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. 13-10-00693-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 01, 2011

Counsel Financial Services, L.L.C. v. DAVID McQUADE LEIBOWITZ AND DAVID McQUADE LEIBOWITZ, P.C.

Counsel Financial Services, L.L.C. appealed the denial of its motion to transfer venue from Hidalgo County to Bexar County. This appeal stemmed from Counsel Financial's intervention in a personal injury lawsuit, seeking to claim attorney's fees owed to David McQuade Leibowitz from a settlement. Leibowitz, in turn, intervened defensively, asserting claims against Counsel Financial and seeking injunctions. The appellate court examined whether an interlocutory appeal of the venue ruling was permissible under section 15.003 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which applies to multiple plaintiffs. The court concluded that Leibowitz was an intervening defendant, not a plaintiff, therefore section 15.003 did not apply, and dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

VenueInterlocutory AppealJurisdictionMotion to TransferTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeInterventionPlaintiff StatusDefendant StatusForeign Judgment EnforcementAppellate Court Dismissal
References
19
Case No. 01-15-00260-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 17, 2015

Joan DeYoung, Stephen DeYoung, M.D., and David DeYoung v. William L. Maynard, Individually and as of the Estate of Judy Page Maynard, and Maynard Properties, L.P.

The DeYoungs, who held ownership interests in Russell, Page & Partners, sued Judy Page Maynard, William L. Maynard, and Maynard Properties, L.P., alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of loyalty and care, conversion, and breach of contract. The lawsuit stemmed from the alleged transfer of partnership property to William L. Maynard and Maynard Properties, L.P., without adequate notice or compensation to the other partners. The trial court initially granted the Maynards' no-evidence motion for summary judgment, which was subsequently designated as a final judgment. As appellants, the DeYoungs argue on appeal that the trial court committed reversible error by granting more relief than requested, failing to specify the elements of claims lacking evidence, improperly shifting the burden of proof on self-dealing, and disregarding competent evidence presented by the DeYoungs. They seek a reversal of the trial court's final judgment and a remand for trial on all asserted causes of action.

Summary JudgmentBreach of Fiduciary DutyDuty of Loyalty and CareConversionBreach of ContractReal Estate PartnershipProperty TransferSelf-DealingProcedural ErrorAppellate Procedure
References
30
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. 04-10-00070-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 10, 2010

in Re K.L. & J. Limited Partnership and David Torres, Relators

This original mandamus proceeding, brought by K.L. & J. Limited Partnership and David Torres (relators and defendants in the underlying case), challenges several discovery rulings made by the trial court in a lawsuit filed by Bella Viveros. The relators sought to compel Viveros to answer deposition questions regarding her citizenship and social security number authenticity, and to amend her petition to include social security information. They also contested the quashing of deposition notices for Viveros's prior employment records. The appellate court conditionally granted mandamus relief in part, directing the trial court to compel answers regarding the authenticity of Viveros's social security number and to withdraw the protective order concerning employment records, finding the trial court abused its discretion in these areas. However, relief was denied regarding citizenship questions and amending the petition, as relators failed to demonstrate an adequate remedy by appeal for the former, and the court found no abuse of discretion for the latter.

MandamusDiscovery DisputeSocial Security NumberEmployment RecordsMotion to CompelProtective OrderAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewTrial Court ErrorSexual Harassment
References
9
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
Showing 1-10 of 2,789 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