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

Smith v. Devane

The case concerns a petitioner who, in 1994, received a deferred adjudication for aggravated sexual assault of a child in Victoria County, Texas, requiring lifelong sex offender registration in Texas. After moving to New York, the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders and the Division of Criminal Justice Services required him to register under New York's Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA). The petitioner challenged this requirement, arguing that a deferred adjudication in Texas is not a 'conviction' under Texas law and thus should not trigger registration in New York. Supreme Court dismissed his petition, and the petitioner appealed. The appellate court affirmed, holding that a guilty plea, even with a deferred adjudication, constitutes a 'conviction' under New York law for SORA purposes, aligning with the legislative intent of public protection.

Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA)Deferred AdjudicationGuilty PleaNew York LawTexas LawInterstate RegistrationCorrection LawCPLR Article 78Public ProtectionRecidivism
References
29
Case No. 03-05-00293-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2006

Derrick E. Pavelka v. Texas Workforce Commission and City of Austin, Texas Aviation Department

Derrick Pavelka appealed a district court's decision that upheld the Texas Workforce Commission's denial of unemployment benefits. Pavelka had been terminated from the City of Austin Aviation Department for falsifying his employment application. This falsification concerned a 1995 nolo contendere plea and deferred adjudication for unlawful weapon carrying, which rendered him ineligible for unescorted airport access under TSA regulations, a requirement for his job. Pavelka argued he believed the charge was dismissed and was unaware of the deferred adjudication status when completing the application. However, the Commission and the district court determined that his knowledge of community supervision and a fine was sufficient to apprise him of the deferred adjudication, concluding his actions constituted misconduct. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that Pavelka failed to demonstrate that the Commission's decision was not supported by substantial evidence.

Unemployment BenefitsMisconduct TerminationFalsified Employment ApplicationDeferred AdjudicationNolo Contendere PleaCriminal History CheckTSA RegulationsAirport SecuritySubstantial Evidence ReviewProcedural Due Process
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 17, 2009

In re Syira W.

This case involves an appeal by a respondent mother from a Family Court order in Erie County, entered on August 17, 2009, which adjudicated her three children as neglected under Family Court Act article 10. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Family Court's decision. The mother's appeal brought up for review the underlying fact-finding order, despite the dispositional order having expired. The court found sufficient evidence to establish neglect, specifically regarding the presence of at least one child during a domestic violence incident. The mother's contention regarding the insufficiency of evidence was not preserved for appellate review; furthermore, the court's credibility determinations regarding a domestic violence case worker's testimony were entitled to deference.

Child NeglectDomestic ViolenceFamily Court Act Article 10Sufficiency of EvidenceCredibility DeterminationAppellate ReviewFact-Finding OrderOrder of DispositionExpired OrderErie County
References
4
Case No. ADJ11381920; ADJ11381922
Regular
Jun 13, 2025

GLORY NANEZ vs. PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, INC.

The defendant, Pasadena Unified School District, sought reconsideration of a WCJ's Findings, Award and Order issued on March 10, 2025, concerning an AME's report liability and the adjudication of accrued temporary disability. The defendant contended that deferring the AME's bill was unsupported and that adjudicating temporary disability without prior notice violated due process. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the F&O to defer the issues of accrued temporary disability benefits and applicant's attorney fees, agreeing that these issues were not properly raised for trial, thereby affirming the WCJ's decision on the medical-legal reimbursement.

Agreed Medical EvaluatorPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrderPermanent Disability IndemnityTemporary Disability IndemnityAccrued Temporary DisabilityAttorney FeesDue ProcessPre-Trial Conference StatementMinutes of Hearing
References
9
Case No. 03-05-00426-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 28, 2007

Terry L. Dunn v. M. Ann Calahan

Terry L. Dunn appealed a summary judgment ruling against him in his lawsuit alleging tortious interference with contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress by Dr. M. Ann Calahan. Dunn, a former Tarleton State University student, was placed on deferred adjudication for public lewdness and subsequently removed from public school classrooms, with Tarleton offering a "deficiency plan" contingent on full disclosure of his arrest to future employers. After applying to Temple Independent School District (TISD), Dunn's partial disclosure and a discrepancy on his application regarding deferred adjudication, along with a reference to a newspaper article by Calahan, led TISD to decline his employment. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that Calahan conclusively negated the elements of intentional interference and causation, as her actions were not a willful inducement to breach a contract nor the direct cause of TISD's decision.

Summary JudgmentTortious Interference with ContractIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressAppellate ReviewDe Novo ReviewCausationWillful and Intentional ActAffirmative DefensesPublic LewdnessTeacher Certification
References
25
Case No. 2-03-164-CR
Regular Panel Decision
May 06, 2004

Lauren Beth Owen v. State

Lauren Beth Owen appealed her conviction for possession of methamphetamine. A jury found Owen guilty and assessed punishment at sixteen years’ confinement and a $10,000 fine. Owen contended the trial court erred by admitting evidence during the guilt-innocence phase that she was on deferred adjudication probation for the instant offense and that she had several fictitious driver’s licenses and credit cards in her possession when arrested. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision regarding the deferred adjudication probation, finding it admissible under Rule 404(b) to rebut Owen’s defense of lacking intent or knowledge. However, the court found the admission of fictitious driver’s licenses and credit cards for impeachment purposes to be an abuse of discretion under Rules 608(b) and 609. Despite this error, the court deemed it harmless due to ample other evidence supporting Owen's guilt. The trial court's judgment was affirmed.

Methamphetamine PossessionDrug ConvictionExtraneous OffensesRule 404(b) EvidenceImpeachment EvidenceDeferred Adjudication ProbationHarmless Error AnalysisAppellate ReviewTexas Court of AppealsCriminal Procedure
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Wilinston BB

This appeal stems from a Family Court order in Albany County, adjudicating the respondent a juvenile delinquent. The respondent contested the Family Court's decision not to suppress his written confession, arguing it was involuntarily made. The appellate court, however, affirmed the Family Court's ruling, finding no evidence of coercion during police questioning and noting the appropriate handling of the respondent's mother's presence. While acknowledging certain evidentiary errors by the Family Court, the appellate panel deemed them harmless given the overwhelming evidence of the respondent's guilt. Consequently, the original order of juvenile delinquency adjudication was affirmed.

juvenile delinquencyconfessionsuppression of evidenceinvoluntary confessionFamily Court Actevidentiary rulingsharmless errorrape first degreesodomy first degreepolice questioning
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Jeanne TT.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Family Court of Chemung County that adjudicated the respondent a person in need of supervision (PINS) and placed her in the custody of the petitioner for 18 months. The PINS adjudication stemmed from the respondent absconding from treatment facilities on three occasions after being removed from her mother's home due to a prior neglect proceeding. The respondent argued that the Family Court abused its discretion by not substituting a neglect petition for the PINS petition and that testimony from social workers violated client-social worker privilege. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion, noting the respondent's behavior was not attributable to parental abuse and occurred while she was in residential treatment. It also ruled that the client-social worker privilege did not apply to the evidence presented, as the communications were not made to a certified social worker or intended to be confidential. Finally, the court affirmed the dispositional order, finding placement necessary given the respondent's history of incorrigible behavior and her mother's surrender of parental rights.

Family Court ActPINS proceedingPerson in Need of SupervisionClient-social worker privilegeCPLR 4508AbscondingPlacement orderAdjournment in contemplation of dismissalNeglect proceedingParental rights surrender
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Jeffrey D.

Petitioner filed a petition under Family Court Act article 10, alleging child abuse and neglect of respondents' three-month-old son, Jeffrey. Initial allegations involved scalding and bruises, later supplemented with claims of numerous fractured ribs following further medical examinations. The Family Court found no abuse but adjudicated the child neglected. The mother appealed, but the Appellate Court rejected the mootness argument, citing the permanent stigma of a neglect adjudication. Based on expert medical testimony from Dr. Louise Godine, who identified nine fractured ribs indicative of forceful squeezing and determined the injuries predated the scalding, the Appellate Court affirmed the Family Court's finding. The court noted the parents' failure to provide a reasonable explanation for the injuries, allowing for strong adverse inferences.

Child Neglect AdjudicationFamily Court Act Article 10Infant Rib FracturesScalding InjuriesMedical Expert TestimonyPreponderance of Evidence StandardMootness Doctrine ApplicationParental Explanations DiscreditedAdverse InferencesAppellate Affirmation
References
9
Case No. ADJ7993613
Regular
Jan 19, 2016

RICHARD MARQUEZ vs. AGRICULTURE & PRIORITY POLLUTANTS LABORATORIES INC., EMPLOYERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE CO.

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and substituted a new award deferring the issue of apportionment. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings that the applicant's psychological injury was not barred by good faith personnel action or post-termination defenses, and that the defendant was not required to file an application for adjudication. The Board found that the parties had stipulated to defer the issue of apportionment to a subsequent hearing.

AOE/COEHypertensionApportionmentLabor Code section 4064(c)Petition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactAwardOrderWCJQME
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 1,876 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