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. 10-06-00236-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 09, 2008

Navasota Resources, L.P. v. First Source Texas, Inc., First Source Gas, LP, Gastar Exploration Texas, LLC F/K/A Bossier Basin, LLC, First Texas Gas, LP, First Source Bossier LLC, Gastar Exploration, LTD., Chesapeake Energy Corp., Chesapeake Exploration LP & Chesapeake Operating. Inc

Navasota Resources, L.P. initiated a lawsuit to enforce a preferential right clause within a joint operating agreement with First Source Texas, Inc. and related entities concerning oil and gas interests. The trial court granted summary judgment for First Source and Chesapeake Energy Corp., denying Navasota's motion. On appeal, the court examined whether the preferential right was triggered by a multi-asset 'package deal' and if Navasota was obligated to accept all additional terms. The appellate court determined that the preferential right was indeed invoked, and Navasota was not required to agree to unrelated conditions like stock purchases or entry into an Area of Mutual Interest. Consequently, the court found a binding contract was formed, the preferential right provision was not an unreasonable restraint on alienation, and rejected defenses of mistake or unconscionability. The judgment of the trial court was reversed, with judgment rendered in favor of Navasota for breach of contract and specific performance, and the case was remanded for determination of attorney's fees and revenues.

Oil and GasPreferential RightJoint Operating AgreementSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractSpecific PerformanceRestraint on AlienationPackage DealAppellate ReviewContractual Option
References
92
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ex Parte Lowe

This habeas corpus proceeding addresses the First Amendment associational rights' privilege against disclosure of membership lists for dissident groups, applied to states via the Fourteenth Amendment. Michael Lowe, Grand Dragon of the Texas Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, was held in contempt for refusing to produce the Klan's membership list during an investigation by the Texas Commission on Human Rights into housing discrimination in Vidor. The court found that the State failed to demonstrate a substantial relation between the requested information and a compelling state interest, as required by federal precedent. The State's various arguments, including a 'Ku Klux Klan' exception and waiver, were rejected. Consequently, the court granted Lowe's petition for writ of habeas corpus and ordered his discharge, emphasizing the protection of associational freedoms.

First AmendmentAssociational RightsHabeas CorpusKu Klux KlanMembership List DisclosureHousing DiscriminationContempt of CourtFreedom of AssociationFourteenth AmendmentCompelling State Interest
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2019

Human Rights Def. Ctr. v. Baxter Cnty.

The case centered on Human Rights Defense Center's (HRDC) challenge against Baxter County's postcard-only mail policy at the Baxter County Jail, alleging violations of First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. HRDC contended the policy unlawfully restricted its ability to send publications to prisoners and that it lacked proper notice for rejected mail. The Court denied the County's motion for reconsideration and dismissed HRDC's First Amendment claim, upholding the policy as rationally related to legitimate penological interests in security, cost-savings, and efficiency. However, a technical due process violation was found for certain August 5, 2016 mailings due to insufficient reasons for rejection, leading to a $4.00 nominal damages award for HRDC. All other Fourteenth Amendment claims were dismissed with prejudice.

Prison mail policyFirst AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessPrisoner rightsConstitutional lawPenological interestsContraband reductionJail efficiencyNominal damages
References
31
Case No. Nos. 2-80-127 and 2-80-129 (Consolidated)
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 1985

Howard Gault Co. v. Texas Rural Legal Aid, Inc.

This case involves two consolidated actions. No. 2-80-127 concerns civil rights counterclaims brought by Jesus Moya against seventeen growers and state officials following the issuance of an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO) that curtailed union organizing activities of the Texas Farm Workers Union (TFWU) in Deaf Smith County, Texas. Moya alleged deprivation of First Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985. No. 2-80-129 is a class action, originally filed by TFWU and TRLA, challenging the constitutionality of several Texas picketing statutes. The court found that the growers and state officials acted under color of state law, depriving Moya of his First Amendment rights due to the unconstitutional ex parte TRO procedure and the overly broad minority picketing provisions. Moya was awarded $500 in compensatory damages. The court also declared multiple sections of the Texas picketing statutes (Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. arts. 5154d, 5154f, and 5154g) unconstitutional. TRLA was denied standing for the constitutional challenges, but Delia Gamez Prince was granted standing. Claims for recovery against the TRO bond were denied.

Workers' RightsFirst AmendmentPicketingTemporary Restraining OrderConstitutional LawCivil Rights Act of 1871Labor DisputesOverbreadth DoctrineState StatutesJudicial Immunity
References
0
Case No. 03-05-00455-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 14, 2006

Startex First Equipment, Ltd. v. Aelina Enterprises, Inc.

This appeal arises from a dispute over the ownership of a .384-acre tract of commercial real property. Appellant Startex First Equipment, Ltd., appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of appellee Aelina Enterprises, Inc., which granted Aelina title to the property. The core issue was whether Startex's right of first refusal, originating from a 1970 Lease and Operating Agreement, survived previous sales of the property and was superior to Aelina's subsequent purchase option. The appellate court found that the explicit language in the Lease Agreement ensured the survival and assignability of the right of first refusal, making Startex's right superior. Therefore, the court reversed the district court's decision and rendered judgment in favor of Startex.

Right of First RefusalReal Property DisputeContract InterpretationSummary Judgment AppealLease AgreementPurchase OptionAssignability of RightsSuperiority of RightsConstructive NoticeInquiry Notice
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Startex First Equipment, Ltd. v. Aelina Enterprises Inc.

This case involves a dispute over the ownership of commercial real property in Bastrop County, Texas. Appellant Startex First Equipment, Ltd., appealed a trial court’s summary judgment that granted title to appellee Aelina Enterprises, Inc. The core issue was whether Startex's right of first refusal, originally granted to Pioneer Oil Company in a 1970 Lease and Operating Agreement, survived subsequent property sales and was superior to Aelina's later-acquired purchase option. The appellate court determined that the right of first refusal, explicitly stating that sales were 'subject to the terms of this lease,' indeed survived previous property transfers and was properly assigned to Startex. Consequently, the court found Startex's right to be superior to Aelina's purchase option, reversing the district court's decision and rendering judgment in favor of Startex.

real propertyright of first refusalpurchase optioncontract interpretationsummary judgmentappealproperty ownershipcommercial leaseassignability of rightsconstructive notice
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 06, 2015

American Civil Rights Union v. Martinez-Rivera

The American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) sued Zavala County Tax Assessor-Collector Cindy Martinez-Rivera for violating the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) by allegedly failing to maintain accurate voter rolls, indicated by a 105% registration rate. Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss challenging ACRU's standing and the sufficiency of the claim, while Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. Magistrate Judge Collis White recommended denying both motions, finding ACRU had organizational standing and stated a plausible claim. District Judge Alia Moses adopted the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, consequently denying both the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and the Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint.

Voter RegistrationNational Voter Registration ActOrganizational StandingMotion to DismissMotion to Amend ComplaintVoter Rolls MaintenanceZavala CountyTexas Election LawSubject Matter JurisdictionConstitutional Standing
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bobby Duncan v. First Texas Homes and First Texas Homes, Inc.

Bobby Duncan, an employee of First Texas Homes, sustained injuries after falling from stairs on a construction site. He alleged negligence, citing unsafe working conditions and failure to inspect the premises, particularly due to insufficient clearance on the stair platform that violated OSHA and company safety standards. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of First Texas. On appeal, the court reversed and remanded, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding First Texas's actual knowledge of the dangerous condition, whether the condition posed an unreasonable risk of harm, and if First Texas's negligence was the proximate cause of Duncan's injuries. The court emphasized that an employee's awareness of a defect does not necessarily eliminate the employer's duty in a nonsubscriber case.

Summary JudgmentPremises LiabilityEmployer NegligenceNonsubscriber EmployerOccupational SafetyConstruction Site InjuryHazardous ConditionForeseeabilityProximate CauseAppellate Review
References
61
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Puentes v. Sullivan

The plaintiff, a former jailer in the El Paso County Sheriff’s Department, filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1985(3), alleging that defendants conspired to terminate his employment due to his political beliefs, violating his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Defendants moved to dismiss the § 1985(3) claim and filed a Motion in Limine regarding the word "conspiracy," arguing the plaintiff failed to allege a class-based discriminatory animus as required by Griffin v. Breckenridge. The court reviewed circuit precedents, including Cameron v. Brock and Action v. Gannon, which held that political belief groups can constitute a class under § 1985(3) and that the Fourteenth Amendment protects First Amendment rights against private conspiracies under Section 5. The court concluded that a private conspiracy to deny First Amendment rights due to membership in a group advocating an unpopular position constitutes an invidiously discriminatory animus. Therefore, the court denied both of the defendants' motions.

First AmendmentFourteenth Amendment42 U.S.C. § 198342 U.S.C. § 1985(3)ConspiracyPolitical BeliefsEmployment TerminationClass-based DiscriminationMotion to DismissMotion in Limine
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson v. San Jacinto Junior College

Plaintiff John R. Johnson, a Registrar at San Jacinto Junior College, brought an action against the College and its board members under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights to privacy, First Amendment rights, and Fourteenth Amendment due process guarantees, after being demoted to a history teacher following an extramarital affair. The court found that defendants violated plaintiff's procedural due process by demoting him without a prior hearing, his substantive due process right to a closed hearing (due to Spencer's disclosure to the press), and his First Amendment right to petition for redress of grievances. However, the court did not find a violation of his constitutional right to privacy and ruled against reinstatement. Plaintiff was awarded damages for lost wages and mental anguish.

Due Process ViolationFirst Amendment RightsEmployment DemotionPublic Education EmploymentUniversity AdministrationConstitutional LawFreedom of SpeechProperty InterestLiberty InterestTeacher Employment
References
102
Showing 1-10 of 12,165 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