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. 11-24-00015-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 08, 2025

Irma J. Leal v. Daniel Lopez

Irma J. Leal appealed the denial of her motion for a new trial following a default divorce judgment in favor of Daniel Lopez. The trial court entered a default judgment after Leal and her counsel failed to appear at a rescheduled final hearing. Leal contended that neither she nor her counsel received proper notice of the hearing, and that she satisfied all three Craddock prongs for setting aside a default judgment. The appellate court found that the lack of proper notice and counsel's misunderstanding constituted an accident or mistake, satisfying the first Craddock prong. Additionally, Leal presented a meritorious defense regarding child conservatorship and support, and demonstrated that a new trial would not cause undue delay, thereby fulfilling the remaining Craddock factors. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial, concluding that the trial court abused its discretion.

Default JudgmentMotion for New TrialAbuse of DiscretionCraddock FactorsDue ProcessNotice of HearingFamily LawDivorce SuitChild ConservatorshipChild Support
References
34
Case No. CA 12-00960
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 01, 2013

CIAPA, DANIEL J. v. MISSO, OTTO

Plaintiff Daniel J. Ciapa initiated a personal injury lawsuit against Otto Misso after a slip and fall incident during his employment at a pizzeria. Misso was both the owner of the property and the president and sole shareholder of 395 Shanley Corp., Ciapa's employer. The Supreme Court granted Misso's motion for summary judgment, which the plaintiff appealed. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, confirming that under Workers’ Compensation Law §§ 11 and 29 (6), the employer and co-employees are shielded from tort liability. The court found that Misso, as the sole shareholder and president, was essentially the same legal entity as the corporate employer for workers' compensation purposes, thus extending the exclusive remedy provisions to him.

Personal InjurySlip and FallWorkers' Compensation LawExclusive RemedyEmployer LiabilityCo-employee ImmunityCorporate Alter EgoSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewPremises Liability
References
22
Case No. E2001-00605-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 23, 2002

Curtis Daniels v. Mary Daniels

This appellate case, Curtis Michael Daniels v. Mary Freels Daniels, concerns the division of marital property and alimony in a divorce. Mary Freels Daniels appealed the trial court's decision regarding her share of Mr. Daniels' retirement benefits, the overall marital estate division, and her eligibility for rehabilitative alimony. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's division of marital assets and the denial of rehabilitative alimony. However, it reversed and remanded the decision concerning Mr. Daniels' unvested TVA pension, ruling it a marital asset subject to equitable division, and provided guidelines for its valuation.

Divorce LawMarital AssetsPension RightsUnvested BenefitsAlimonySpousal SupportProperty DivisionEquitable DistributionAppellate ProcedureRemand
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bane v. Daniel Construction Co.

In this workers' compensation case, the employer, Daniel Construction Company, appealed a trial court's decision to award benefits to its employee, William J. Bane. The employer contended that Bane made willful and knowing misrepresentations regarding his physical condition on his employment application, which should bar recovery. Bane had previously experienced minor back issues but denied them on an ambiguously worded medical history form before suffering a ruptured disc while working for Daniel Construction. The Supreme Court applied a three-part test, finding the employer failed to prove knowing misrepresentation, material reliance, or a causal connection between the alleged misrepresentation and the subsequent injury. Consequently, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the award of medical expenses and partial disability benefits to Bane.

Workers' CompensationMedical MisrepresentationEmployment ApplicationBack InjuryRuptured DiscCausal ConnectionPre-existing ConditionEmployer RelianceTrial Court JudgmentAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. 01-21-00008-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2024

Sealy Emergency Room, L.L.C. and Kannappan Krishnaswamy, M.D. v. Dr. Atul Dhingra, Dr. Swapan Dubey and Dr. Sanjeev Dubey

Appellants Sealy Emergency Room, L.L.C., and Dr. Kannappan Krishnaswamy appealed a trial court's summary judgment in favor of appellees Free Standing Emergency Room Managers of America, L.L.C., Dr. Atul Dhingra, Dr. Swapan Dubey, and Dr. Sanjeev Dubey. The dispute arose from a management agreement for an emergency room, with appellants bringing counterclaims and third-party claims for breach of contract, fraud, fraudulent inducement, and negligence. After a previous dismissal for lack of appellate jurisdiction was reversed by the Texas Supreme Court, the First District of Texas Court of Appeals reviewed the merits. The court found that the appellants failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact on any of their claims, concluding that the alleged breaches of contract were not supported by the agreement's plain language or that the best-efforts clause was unenforceable. Furthermore, claims of fraud and negligence were not substantiated or were barred by the economic loss rule. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment.

Contract DisputeSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewBreach of ContractFraudFraudulent InducementNegligenceEconomic Loss RuleTexas LawHealthcare Management
References
45
Case No. 2022-03-0563 (State File Nos. 800889-2022, 26980-2022)
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 04, 2023

Perez, Oscar v. J&J Tovar Construction, LLC

The employee, Oscar L. Romero Perez, suffered significant injuries while working for J&J Tovar Construction, LLC, which was uninsured for workers' compensation. Homestead Construction, Inc., a statutory employer, had a policy with Northstone Insurance Company, but Northstone filed a declaratory judgment action challenging its contract's validity. The trial court ordered J&J Tovar and/or Homestead to provide ongoing medical benefits. J&J Tovar appealed, arguing Northstone should be specifically ordered to pay. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's order, ruling that Northstone remains liable for benefits under Tennessee's Workers' Compensation Law unless and until a court of competent jurisdiction voids the insurance contract, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationStatutory EmployerInsurance Coverage DisputeDeclaratory Judgment ActionMedical BenefitsUninsured EmployerInterlocutory AppealAppeals Board DecisionTennessee LawJoint and Several Liability
References
6
Case No. 2007 NY Slip Op 27390
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 04, 2007

Matter of A. J.

The Administration for Children's Services (ACS) filed a petition alleging that four-year-old T.J. sustained multiple injuries, including a second-degree burn, while in the care of her biological parents, Toni N. and Tyrell J. The parents had previously been found to have abused T.J. The court found the parents' explanations for the injuries incredible and inconsistent with medical testimony from Dr. Philip Hyden, an expert in pediatrics and child abuse. The court entered findings of abuse against both parents for T.J. under Family Court Act § 1012 (e) (i) and derivative abuse findings for her siblings, J.W., J.N., A.J., A.N., and T.S., under Family Court Act § 1012 (e) (ii). Furthermore, the court determined that T.J. was "repeatedly abused" as defined by Social Services Law § 384-b (8) (b) due to the prior abuse findings and the unsuccessful efforts to rehabilitate the parents. However, derivative findings of repeated abuse were not made for the siblings.

Child AbuseRepeated AbuseDerivative AbuseFoster CareParental RightsFamily Court ActSocial Services LawPhysical InjuryMedical ExpertChild Protection Unit
References
10
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. 2019 NY Slip Op 06859
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2019

Matter of Sariyah L.J. (Antonio J.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Family Court order that denied Antonio J.'s motion to vacate a default order which determined him to be a notice-only father. The court found that Antonio J. failed to provide a reasonable excuse for his default, having chosen to attend a meeting with his shelter worker without notifying his attorney or the court. Furthermore, he failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense, as his affidavit did not establish substantial and continuous contact or financial support for the child, Sariyah L.J., in accordance with Domestic Relations Law § 111 [1] [d]. The appeal from the underlying August 20, 2018 order was dismissed as nonappealable.

Family LawPaternityDefault JudgmentVacaturParental RightsChild CustodyAppellate ProcedureDue ProcessInfant CaseMotion Practice
References
4
Case No. 03-15-00293-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2015

Bob E. Woody v. J. Black's, LP And J. Black's GP, LLC

Bob E. Woody initiated a lawsuit against J. Black's, L.P. and J. Black's, G.P., L.L.C. concerning a commercial sublease, seeking its termination. J. Black's counterclaimed for breach of contract, asserting that Woody had improperly rejected their lease extension and declared them in default. The trial court initially granted multiple partial summary judgments in favor of J. Black's, finding Woody in breach and dismissing all of his claims. On appeal, the Amarillo Court of Appeals affirmed Woody's breach but remanded for a determination of whether J. Black's was ready, willing, and able to perform, a prerequisite for specific performance. Upon remand, the trial court found J. Black's met this condition and awarded specific performance of the sublease and attorney's fees to J. Black's.

Commercial LeaseSublease AgreementBreach of ContractSpecific PerformanceAttorney's FeesTexas LawReal Estate DisputeLease ExtensionSummary JudgmentAppellate Review
References
38
Showing 1-10 of 4,893 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