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. W2001-01683-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2002

Patsy Mitchell v. Dr. James Ensor

Patsy Mitchell and her husband Steve Mitchell, appellants, brought a medical malpractice action against Dr. James Ensor, M.D., and Memphis Internal Medicine, P.L.L.C., appellees. The plaintiffs alleged Dr. Ensor negligently administered a Depo-Testosterone injection to Mrs. Mitchell for diminished libido without informed consent, resulting in virilizing side effects, including clitoral enlargement. The Circuit Court for Shelby County entered judgment on a jury verdict for the defendants. On appeal, the plaintiffs challenged the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on lack of informed consent and the admissibility of expert witness testimony. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the jury instructions or the admission of expert testimony on alternate causes, and remanded the case.

Medical MalpracticeInformed ConsentTestosterone InjectionDepo-TestosteroneClitoral EnlargementVirilizationHormone Replacement TherapyJury InstructionsExpert Witness TestimonyMedical Causation
References
36
Case No. 03-14-00112-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 10, 2016

Dr. James Jones v. Angelo State University

Dr. James Jones, an associate professor at Angelo State University, sued his former employer for religious discrimination, alleging he was discharged due to his religious beliefs and practices, specifically making religious statements in class. The University cited violation of policy, declining performance, and insubordination as reasons for his non-reappointment. The trial court granted summary judgment for the University. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of Jones's discriminatory discharge claim based on disparate treatment. However, it reversed and remanded the portion of the judgment regarding the University's alleged failure to accommodate Jones's religious practice, finding the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on this ground.

Religious DiscriminationEmployment LawSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewTexas Labor CodeFailure to AccommodateDisparate TreatmentAcademic EmploymentUniversity PolicyReligious Freedom
References
18
Case No. 04-17-00160-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2018

Robert B. James, DDS, Inc. Robert B. James, DDS, Individually Jean James, Individually And Alexis Mei Pyles, Individually v. Cassandra J. Elkins, DDS

Dr. Elkins sued her former employer and related individuals for defamation, business disparagement, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), and conspiracy, alleging false statements about her financial misconduct. The defendants sought dismissal under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA), arguing their communications were protected free speech. The trial court denied these motions. This concurring and dissenting opinion argues that the TCPA applies to Dr. Elkins's claims and that she failed to present sufficient evidence for the elements of actual malice and outrageous conduct for her claims. Therefore, the dissenting judge would reverse the trial court's order in its entirety, dismiss Dr. Elkins's claims, and remand for a determination of attorneys' fees and costs. The opinion also finds that the appellate court lacks jurisdiction over Dr. Elkins's motions for discovery and continuance.

Texas LawDefamationBusiness DisparagementIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressCivil ConspiracyTCPAAnti-SLAPPQualified PrivilegeActual MaliceEmployment Dispute
References
46
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. 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. CA 15-00709
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 13, 2015

ANDERSON, ROBERT JAMES v. KERNAN, JAMES M.

Plaintiff Robert James Anderson initiated an action against James M. Kernan and Marlene Kernan, seeking damages for an alleged breach of a joint venture agreement. The purpose of this alleged venture was to develop a market for workers' compensation insurance coverage through professional employer organizations (PEO). The Supreme Court, Oneida County, granted the defendants' motions for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint. The Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, unanimously affirmed this decision, concluding that both Marlene Kernan and James M. Kernan made prima facie showings that they did not agree to enter into a joint venture with the plaintiff. The court further found that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact, noting that an 'agreement to agree' on a general principle is unenforceable due to indefiniteness in contract law.

Joint Venture AgreementBreach of ContractSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewContract LawIndefinitenessAgreement to AgreeWorkers' Compensation InsuranceProfessional Employer OrganizationsCivil Procedure
References
6
Case No. 2017-01-0228
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 17, 2017

Ducros, James v. Metro Roofing and Metal Supply Co., Inc.

The employee, James Ducros, a truck driver, injured his right wrist while working for Metro Roofing and Metal Supply Co., Inc. The employer initially directed him to a family physician and then to a hand specialist, Dr. Woodfin Kennedy. After Dr. Kennedy recommended diagnostic testing, the employer provided a panel of physicians and insisted the employee select a new treating physician, which he did under perceived duress, choosing Dr. Peter Lund. When Dr. Lund suggested a second opinion and Ducros wanted to return to Dr. Kennedy, the employer refused. The trial court denied Ducros's request to have Dr. Kennedy designated as his authorized treating physician. The Appeals Board reversed the trial court's decision, concluding that the employer failed to timely meet its statutory obligation to provide a panel of physicians, thus remaining responsible for treatment with Dr. Kennedy.

Workers' Compensation AppealEmployer Medical PanelEmployee Physician ChoiceTimely Panel ProvisionAuthorized Treating PhysicianMedical Treatment DisputesRight Wrist SprainEmployer Non-ComplianceCoercion in Physician SelectionDr. Kennedy
References
7
Case No. AP-77,029
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 03, 2015

Harris, James Jr.

This document is a transcript from a Capital Murder trial involving James Harris Jr. It primarily covers two main aspects: a Rule 705 examination for expert witness Dr. Raymond Singer and the individual voir dire of potential jurors (Ms. Woods, Ms. Cooper, Ms. Lee, and Ms. Vanscoy). During the expert witness hearing, the judge allows Dr. Singer to testify as a neuropsychologist and neurotoxicologist, despite the State's objections regarding his qualifications and past exclusions from testifying in other courts, while also allowing the State to cross-examine on those past exclusions. The bulk of the transcript details the extensive questioning of several potential jurors by both the prosecution and defense, delving into their views on the death penalty, presumptions of innocence, burden of proof, circumstantial evidence, voluntary intoxication, and their ability to follow specific legal instructions, including disregarding confessions and considering mitigating circumstances. The defense repeatedly challenges jurors for cause, citing biases towards the death penalty and an inability to consider mitigation or disregard confessions, but these challenges are largely denied by the court. The defense's request for additional peremptory strikes is also denied, leading to an objectionable juror being seated.

Capital MurderExpert Witness TestimonyNeurotoxicologyNeuropsychologyVoir DireJury SelectionDeath PenaltyMitigating CircumstancesFuture DangerousnessConfession Admissibility
References
39
Case No. Docket No. 2018-08-0644, State File No. 65793-2017
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 26, 2018

Hurd, James v. Kellogg Company

Mr. James Hurd, an operations supervisor at Kellogg Company, sustained a knee injury while descending stairs at work on August 27, 2017. Kellogg denied his claim, deeming it an idiopathic injury. Mr. Hurd sought medical treatment with Dr. Marc Mihalko, who surgically repaired a ruptured quadriceps tendon. The Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims at Memphis conducted an Expedited Hearing and ruled that Mr. Hurd's injury likely arose out of his employment, rejecting Kellogg's idiopathic injury defense. Consequently, the Court ordered Kellogg to pay Mr. Hurd's medical bills, continue treatment with Dr. Mihalko, and awarded attorney's fees due to Kellogg's wrongful denial of the claim.

Workers' CompensationKnee InjuryIdiopathic InjuryMedical BenefitsAttorney's FeesExpedited HearingCausationEmployment HazardTennessee LawQuadriceps Tendon Rupture
References
11
Case No. 2017-02-0444
Regular Panel Decision
May 14, 2018

James, Connie v. HP Cambridge House

Connie James, an employee at HP Cambridge House, sustained a right knee injury in September 2015 after tripping over a cord. She sought medical benefits for additional treatment with Dr. Billy Parsley due to continued pain, despite a pre-existing arthritic knee condition. The employer, Cambridge House, disputed causation, arguing the pre-existing condition and an intervening incident broke the chain of causation. The Court found Dr. Parsley's opinion clear, stating the work incident exacerbated the pre-existing condition and contributed more than fifty percent to the injury. The Court ordered Cambridge House to schedule an appointment for Ms. James with Dr. Parsley, granting her request for medical benefits.

Workers' CompensationKnee InjuryPre-existing ConditionExacerbationMedical BenefitsCausationExpedited HearingAuthorized Treating PhysicianArthritic KneeTotal Knee Arthroplasty
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 3,772 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