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

Cummins v. Brodie

Wade Cummins, an Elvis impersonator, sued Steve Brodie and Elvis Wade International, Inc. for breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, and violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. Cummins alleged that Brodie, an entrepreneur who sought to promote Cummins' career, advised him to cancel several nightclub performance dates with promises of better bookings, but failed to secure replacements. The Trial Court found that an implied contract existed, Brodie took control of Cummins' bookings, and Cummins suffered damages from cancelled engagements. The Trial Court awarded Cummins $75,000 plus costs, finding Brodie liable for breach of contract due to his failure to obtain replacement bookings. On appeal, the court affirmed the Trial Court's findings of liability and the award of damages, rejecting Brodie's arguments regarding insufficient evidence and failure to mitigate damages.

Breach of ContractImplied ContractFraudulent MisrepresentationTennessee Consumer Protection ActDamage MitigationLost ProfitsEntertainer ContractBooking Agent LiabilityAppellate ReviewTrial Court Findings
References
12
Case No. 2016-1722 K C
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 08, 2019

Parisien v. 21st Century Ins. Co.

In this case, Jules Francois Parisien, M.D., as assignee of Elvis Gregoine, appealed an order from the Civil Court concerning first-party no-fault benefits against 21st Century Insurance Company. The Civil Court had denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granted defendant's cross-motion, dismissing several causes of action. The Appellate Term modified the Civil Court's order, denying the branches of defendant's cross-motion that sought summary judgment dismissing the second and fifth causes of action. The court found a triable issue of fact regarding the timely mailing of the claim form for the second cause of action and deemed a follow-up EUO scheduling letter for the fifth cause of action untimely. Consequently, the original order was affirmed as modified, without costs.

No-Fault BenefitsSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewTimely MailingExamination Under OathInsurance CoverageProcedural ComplianceAssignee RightsClaim DenialCivil Court Appeal
References
8
Case No. No. 10-07-00320-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 08, 2008

Joan E. Givens, Shannon Kraus, and Gregory D. Givens, Individually and as Independent of the Estate of William L. Givens, J. Harold Sewell and Alamo Title Company v. Elvis Ward and Dianna Ward

This case concerns a property transaction involving the sale of a 115-acre tract from the Givenses to the Wards, where a mineral interest reservation specified in the sales contract was omitted from the subsequent warranty deed. The Wards filed a declaratory judgment action, claiming ownership of the mineral rights, while the Givenses counterclaimed for deed reformation based on mutual mistake. Additionally, J. Harold Sewell and Alamo Title Company intervened, alleging breach of a compliance agreement and seeking specific performance from the Wards for refusing to sign a correction deed. The trial court granted summary judgment for the Wards, but the appellate court found genuine issues of material fact regarding the original agreement for mineral reservation and the existence of a mutual mistake. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Real Estate LawMineral RightsDeed ReformationMutual MistakeContract InterpretationSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewProperty LawCompliance AgreementTexas Law
References
59
Case No. 02A01-9804-CV-00117
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 1998

Jean Dotson v. Amanda Blake

Jean Carolyn Dotson was injured in an automobile accident involving Amanda Blake, Dan Blake, and the Estate of Elvis C. Maddox, Sr. Martin Manor Associates (MMA) was later added as a defendant, being the party that designed and built the roadway. Dotson alleged the Martin Manor apartment complex access road was improperly located, creating a hazard. MMA asserted that Hnedek, Bobo, Gooch and Associates (Architect) and S. Webster Haining & Company (Contractor) were responsible. However, claims against the Architect and Contractor were barred by a statute of repose. The trial court denied MMA's motion to attribute fault to these non-parties and refused certain jury instructions. The jury found 51% fault to MMA and 49% to the City of Martin, assigning zero fault to the drivers involved in the collision. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that fault may not be attributed to non-parties immune from suit pursuant to a statute of repose.

Automobile accidentComparative negligenceStatute of reposeNon-party fault attributionJury instructionsApportionment of faultArchitectural design liabilityConstruction liabilityRoadway design defectDuty of landowner
References
14
Case No. M1998-00934-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 07, 2001

Wade Cummins v. Opryland Productions

This case involves an alleged breach of an oral contract and a claim of negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiffs, an Elvis impersonator and his band, claimed Opryland Productions failed to honor an oral agreement to book them for the 1996 Summer Olympics, despite no written contract being executed. They also alleged negligent misrepresentation based on assurances from Opryland's agent. The trial court granted summary judgment for Opryland. The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment on the contract claim, finding no mutual assent or sufficiently definite terms, but reversed the summary judgment on the negligent misrepresentation claim, noting that contractual privity is not required for this tort and disputed facts exist regarding faulty information and justifiable reliance.

Contract LawOral ContractNegligent MisrepresentationSummary JudgmentMutual AssentBreach of ContractAppellate ReviewTort LawCommercial TransactionsElvis Impersonator
References
34
Case No. ADJ10446162, ADJ11588763
Regular
Aug 19, 2019

Elvie Santiago vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, PATTON STATE HOSPITAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, rescinding the initial Joint Findings & Award. The Board found that the administrative law judge improperly "added" psychiatric and orthopedic disabilities without medical evidence or notice to the parties, deviating from the standard Combined Values Chart method. The matter is returned to the judge to develop the record regarding permanent disability ratings, while affirming a stipulated credit for temporary disability overpayment. Issues of permanent disability and attorney's fees are deferred pending further proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings & AwardApportionmentOrthopedic DisabilityPsychiatric DisabilityCombined Values ChartAgreed Medical ExaminerMaximum Medical ImprovementPosttraumatic Stress Disorder
References
0
Case No. W1998-00710-SC-R11-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2000

Dotson v. Blake

Chief Justice Anderson dissents from the majority's decision, which permits juries to allocate fault to tortfeasors who successfully assert a statute of repose defense, despite the plaintiff having no cause of action against them. This ruling follows Carroll v. Whitney and reverses established precedents like Ridings v. Ralph M. Parsons Co. The dissent argues that this approach deviates from McIntyre v. Balentine's balanced comparative fault principles, unfairly burdens plaintiffs with the entire risk of loss, and undermines judicial consistency and the doctrine of stare decisis. The Chief Justice criticizes the majority for prioritizing defendants' fairness without considering plaintiffs' interests or exploring alternative solutions like pure comparative fault or distributing fault among all parties. The dissent concludes that the change in policy lacks sufficient justification and threatens the reliability of the Supreme Court's decisions.

Comparative FaultStatute of ReposeTortfeasor LiabilityJudicial PrecedentStare DecisisAppellate ReviewImmunity DefensePlaintiff's Cause of ActionJury Allocation of FaultLegal Policy Change
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kelley v. State

Appellant Elvis Kelley was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, receiving a 99-year prison sentence and a $10,000 fine. On appeal, the court upheld the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, finding law enforcement had reasonable suspicion for the search and that Kelley lacked standing to challenge it. However, the conviction was reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly allowed the prosecution to impeach a defense witness by introducing evidence of appellant's involvement as a co-defendant in an unrelated pending drug case, ruling that the prejudicial effect of this extraneous offense outweighed its probative value.

Criminal LawDrug PossessionIntent to DeliverMotion to SuppressIllegal SearchAccomplice TestimonyExtraneous OffenseImpeachmentStanding to ContestFourth Amendment
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Joshua J.

The father appealed a Family Court order that found he neglected his child, Joshua. The neglect finding was based on the father's refusal to allow DSS workers and police into his home for an unannounced visit, despite a prior agreement to cooperate with DSS supervision. The father argued he refused entry for safety reasons, citing a past robbery and concerns about impersonators, and that Joshua was found clean, healthy, and safe. The appellate court reversed the Family Court's order, finding that DSS failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Joshua's condition was impaired or in imminent danger due to the father's actions. Consequently, the petition was denied, and the proceeding was dismissed.

Child NeglectChild Protective ServicesFamily Court ActParental RightsAppellate ReviewPreponderance of EvidenceDSS SupervisionUnannounced VisitsHome Entry RefusalChild Safety
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Hobika

The respondent, an attorney admitted in 1997, was convicted of criminal solicitation in the fourth degree in 1999, a class A misdemeanor. This conviction stemmed from his actions in a Workers' Compensation case where he solicited the dying claimant's sister to impersonate the claimant and provide perjured testimony to secure a $22,000 lump-sum settlement. He coached the sister on her testimony and arranged for an unsuspecting attorney to appear with her. The Workers' Compensation Board approved the settlement based on this false testimony, and the claimant died shortly after. The Court deemed criminal solicitation a serious crime involving interference with the administration of justice, undermining public trust. Despite considering mitigating factors, the Court rejected the respondent's attempt to minimize his misconduct and found him unfit to practice law, leading to his disbarment.

Attorney DisciplineProfessional MisconductCriminal SolicitationPerjuryAdministration of JusticeDisbarmentWorkers' Compensation FraudEthical ViolationsAppellate DivisionNew York Law
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 12 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