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. ADJ6705462
Regular
Oct 24, 2018

DON ESQUEDA vs. PACIFIC COAST SHOTCRETE, INC., UEBTF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Don Esqueda's Petition for Reconsideration based on the Administrative Law Judge's report. The Board also dismissed Esqueda's Petition for Removal, finding it was an improper procedural vehicle. Appeals Board Rule 10843 requires demonstration that reconsideration is inadequate to seek removal. An Order Dismissing Lien is considered a final order, making reconsideration the appropriate remedy, not removal.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJ ReportFinal OrderOrder Dismissing LienLien ClaimantSubstantive RightLiabilitySafeway Stores
References
2
Case No. 03-10-00019-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 2011

Dr. Don Brantley, Belinda Castillo, Dr. Corinne Alvarez-Sanders and Patricia Logterman// Texas Youth Commission Cherrie Townsend in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director v. Texas Youth Commission Cherrie Townsend in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director// Dr. Don Brantley, Belinda Castillo, Dr. Corinne Alvarez-Sanders

This case concerns challenges by current and former employees of the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) against the constitutionality of Senate Bill 103, which converted TYC employment from 'for-cause' to 'at-will.' The plaintiffs, including Dr. Don Brantley, Belinda Castillo, Dr. Corinne Alvarez-Sanders, and Patricia Logterman, sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief based on alleged wrongful termination, due process violations, defamation, and unconstitutional takings. The district court partially granted and denied TYC's plea to the jurisdiction. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of Castillo's claims for lack of ripeness and the defamation and takings claims for all plaintiffs due to sovereign immunity. It reversed in part, allowing Alvarez-Sanders and Logterman to replead their wrongful-termination/due-process claims for equitable relief against a proper state official, and similarly reversed in part Brantley's wrongful-termination/due-process claim.

Employment LawPublic EmployeesAt-Will EmploymentFor-Cause EmploymentDue ProcessConstitutional LawRetroactive LegislationEx Post Facto LawBill of AttainderSovereign Immunity
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cox v. Don's Welding Service, Inc.

A construction worker, John J. Stachera, died on April 17, 1972, after being struck by a defective metal boom. His estate sued Don's Welding Service, Inc. for negligence, breach of warranty, and wrongful death, alleging the boom was improperly welded. The trial court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint at the close of proof, as well as Don's Welding Service's cross-claim against the third-party defendant, Depew Paving Co., Inc. The appellate court reversed the judgment, concluding that sufficient circumstantial evidence existed, especially given the lower burden of proof in wrongful death actions, to withstand a motion to dismiss under CPLR 4401. Consequently, a new trial was granted for the plaintiff.

Wrongful deathNegligenceBreach of warrantyConstruction accidentDefective weldingCircumstantial evidenceCPLR 4401Prima facie evidenceBurden of proofAppellate review
References
4
Case No. 14-09-00718-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 28, 2011

Deborah Downing v. Don Burns and Sherry Burns

Deborah Downing sued Don and Sherry Burns for tortious interference and defamation after they alleged she stole trade secrets and threatened to sue her new employers. Downing, previously an assistant to Don Burns, copied parts of a policy manual she authored before resigning. The Burnses countersued for theft of trade secrets. A jury found in Downing's favor on all claims, but the trial court entered judgment only on tortious interference and theft. The appellate court reversed the judgment, concluding that the Burnses did not conclusively prove theft of trade secrets and that sufficient evidence supported the defamation and tortious interference findings, but the damages for tortious interference were unsupported. The case was remanded for a new trial due to the intertwined nature of the claims.

Tortious InterferenceDefamationTheft of Trade SecretsLost WagesEconomic DamagesLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceJudgment Notwithstanding VerdictRemandAppellate ReviewRealty Business
References
26
Case No. 01-13-00406-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2014

Omorinsola Ogunbanjo v. Don McGill of West Houston, Ltd

Omorinsola Ogunbanjo appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Don McGill of West Houston, Ltd. Ogunbanjo sued Don McGill for negligence and gross negligence after a dealership salesman allegedly sexually assaulted her during a ride home. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding no evidence for negligent hiring due to a lack of foreseeability and no respondeat superior liability as the salesman's actions were outside the scope of employment. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that summary judgment was proper on both negligence and gross negligence claims, and consequently on the mental anguish damages claim, as these were dependent on the predicate negligence finding.

NegligenceGross NegligenceSummary JudgmentRespondeat SuperiorNegligent HiringForeseeabilityScope of EmploymentEmployer LiabilitySexual MisconductAppellate Review
References
28
Case No. NO. 14-07-01085-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2009

Fred Samson v. James Manley and Don Jackson

Fred Samson appealed the trial court's granting of summary judgments in favor of appellees James Manley and Don Jackson. Samson had sued his former attorney, Manley, and the opposing counsel in a 1988 workers' compensation suit, Jackson, after his medical payments were discontinued due to the insurer's insolvency. Samson alleged various causes of action including fraud, civil conspiracy, theft, breach of contract, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgments, finding that Samson failed to present any evidence to support his claims against either Manley or Jackson. The trial court did not specify the grounds for granting the summary judgments, and the appellate court found no error.

Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewNo-Evidence MotionWorkers' CompensationLegal MalpracticeCivil ConspiracyFraudBreach of ContractIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressStatute of Limitations
References
20
Case No. 03-01-00103-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 24, 2003

HEB Ministries, Inc. Southern Bible Institute And Hispanic Bible Institute/Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and Commissioner Don W. Brown v. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and Commissioner Don W. Brown/HEB Ministries, Inc.

HEB Ministries, Inc., operating Tyndale Theological Seminary, challenged the constitutionality of Texas Education Code provisions requiring private postsecondary institutions to obtain state certification or accreditation for granting degrees and using terms like "seminary." The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board counterclaimed for injunctions and administrative penalties. The district court found the degree-granting regulation constitutional but the "seminary" term regulation unconstitutional. The Court of Appeals affirmed the constitutionality of the degree-granting regulation and upheld the $170,000 penalty. It reversed the district court's finding on the "seminary" term, declaring it constitutional, and reinstated a $3,000 penalty, remanding for a permanent injunction consistent with its opinion.

ConstitutionalityFirst AmendmentFree Exercise ClauseEstablishment ClauseFree Speech ClauseTexas Education CodeHigher Education RegulationDegree-Granting AuthorityAccreditation StandardsReligious Educational Institutions
References
43
Case No. 2-09-265-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 28, 2010

Don Norris and Avery Air Conditioning/Heating and A-ABAC Services, Inc. v. Shelby Jackson

Appellants Don Norris and Avery Air Conditioning/Heating and A-ABAC Services, Inc. appealed a judgment following a bench trial in favor of Appellee Shelby Jackson. The appellants contended that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient to establish DTPA violations, economic damages, an unconscionable act by Norris, mental anguish damages, and entitlement to treble damages or attorney's fees. The trial court found that Avery violated the DTPA by misrepresenting rights and failing to disclose information, causing $500 in economic damages, which were trebled. It also found Norris committed an unconscionable act intentionally, causing $2,500 in mental anguish damages, also trebled. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support all findings.

Deceptive Trade Practices ActDTPA ViolationUnconscionable ActEconomic DamagesMental AnguishSufficiency of EvidenceAttorney's FeesContract ModificationConsumer ProtectionTexas Law
References
46
Case No. 08-20-00039-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2021

Don Zimmerman v. City of Austin And Spencer Cronk, in His Official Capacity as City Manager of the City of Austin

Don Zimmerman, a taxpayer in Austin, sued the City of Austin and its City Manager for allocating $150,000 for abortion access support services. Zimmerman argued the expenditure was illegal, violating both unrepealed Texas criminal abortion statutes and the Texas Constitution's Gift Clause. The trial court granted the City's plea to the jurisdiction, dismissing the claims. On appeal, the Eighth District Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the trial court's decision. The appellate court ruled that the criminal abortion statutes were rendered null and void by Roe v. Wade, thus Zimmerman's first claim lacked a legal basis. Furthermore, the court found Zimmerman's Gift Clause claim was not ripe for review, as the funds had not yet been dispersed and depended on several future contingencies.

Taxpayer StandingUltra ViresGovernmental ImmunityAbortion AccessTexas Criminal Abortion StatutesRoe v. WadeTexas Constitution Gift ClausePlea to JurisdictionRipeness DoctrineAdvisory Opinions
References
46
Case No. 02-24-00305-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2025

Mitch Vexler, Catherine Vexler, Mavex Shops of Flower Mound, LP, Jim Solinski, and Gloria Solinski v. Don Spencer, in His Capacity as Chief Appraiser of Denton Central Appraisal District, and Denton Central Appraisal District

The appellants, Denton County property owners, sued the Denton Central Appraisal District (DCAD) and its Chief Appraiser, Don Spencer, challenging their property taxes and DCAD's implementation of the Texas Tax Code. They alleged DCAD fraudulently increased property values and sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and tax refunds. The trial court granted DCAD's and Spencer's pleas to the jurisdiction, dismissing the claims. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that the Texas Tax Code's administrative remedies are exclusive for property tax disputes and the appellants lacked standing for their constitutional challenge. The court denied a remand for repleading as the appellants had ample opportunity to amend their petition.

Property TaxAppraisal DistrictTax CodeJurisdictionSovereign ImmunityGovernmental ImmunityDeclaratory ReliefInjunctive ReliefTax RefundStanding
References
43
Showing 1-10 of 88 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