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. M2004-01910-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 01, 2005

Rickey W. Pendleton v. The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County

Rickey W. Pendleton sued the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County for injuries sustained during his arrest by metropolitan police officers, alleging assault and battery and vicarious liability through respondeat superior. The trial court granted summary judgment for the government, ruling that a standalone respondeat superior claim was insufficient under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA) for intentional torts, requiring a separate negligence claim against the governmental entity. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, holding that the GTLA mandates a direct showing of negligence by the governmental entity for intentional torts committed by its employees, and Pendleton failed to assert such a claim against the Metropolitan Government.

Governmental Tort Liability ActRespondeat SuperiorSummary JudgmentIntentional TortsNegligenceAssault and BatteryPolice MisconductGovernmental ImmunityTennessee LawMunicipal Liability
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Friedar v. Government of Israel

Samuel Friedar, a New York citizen, sued the Government of Israel and its branches for failing to compensate him for medical costs and expenses incurred after being injured while serving in the Israeli Army in 1948. Friedar alleged breach of contract, intentional withholding of information, negligent loss of files, and wrongful conversion of funds. The Government moved to dismiss, claiming sovereign immunity under 28 U.S.C. § 1604 and that the action was barred by the Act of State doctrine. The Court found that the Government was entitled to sovereign immunity, rejecting Friedar's arguments for exceptions based on waiver or commercial activity. Furthermore, even if jurisdiction existed, the Court would dismiss the case under the Act of State doctrine, citing the impropriety of reviewing a foreign state's internal administrative activity, especially regarding military and veterans' benefits. The Government’s motion to dismiss was granted.

Sovereign ImmunityAct of State DoctrineMotion to DismissForeign Sovereign Immunities ActFSIAGovernmental ImmunityCommercial Activity ExceptionVeterans' BenefitsJurisdictionInternational Law
References
13
Case No. M2015-00455-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2016

John P. Branham v. The Metropolitan Government of Nashville - Davidson County, Tennessee

Landowner John P. Branham sued the Metropolitan Government of Nashville-Davidson County for damages to his property caused by landslides, alleging inverse condemnation, detrimental reliance, and negligence. The trial court initially ruled in favor of Metro on all claims and held that Metro owned the land adjacent to Branham's property. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the finding of Metro's ownership, determining that Metro only possessed a right-of-way easement. However, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment regarding the claims of inverse condemnation and negligence, concluding that the primary cause of the landslides was a 2010 rainfall event, not Metro's actions, and no competent proof of diminution in value was presented.

inverse condemnationdetrimental reliancenegligencelandslidesproperty damageright-of-wayeasementexpert witness credibilityproperty valuationappellate review
References
22
Case No. M2015-01488-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 30, 2016

The Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County v. The Civil Service Commission of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville And Davidson County, Tennessee

An officer with the Davidson County Sheriff's Department, Jerry Clark, was terminated for dishonesty after filing reports alleging he was attacked during training, which an investigation found to be exaggerated. An administrative law judge initially ordered his reinstatement with a ten-day suspension, a decision adopted by the Civil Service Commission. However, the Metropolitan Government sought judicial review, and the chancery court reversed the Commission's decision, finding it unsupported by substantial evidence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the chancery court's ruling, concluding that the ALJ's findings were not backed by material evidence and remanded the case to the Commission for a determination of appropriate disciplinary action.

Police MisconductTermination of EmploymentDishonestyAdministrative ReviewJudicial PrecedentCivil Service LawSubstantial Evidence RuleWorkers' Compensation ClaimsRetaliation AllegationsDue Process Rights
References
7
Case No. M2017-00565-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 04, 2018

David R. Fitzgerald v. Hickman County Government

This appeal involves a former county employee, David R. Fitzgerald, whose claims against Hickman County Government and its mayor, Shaun Lawson, were largely dismissed following his employment termination. Fitzgerald alleged violations of due process, indemnification, restitution, negligence, invasion of privacy (including false light), workplace harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and misrepresentation. The trial court dismissed most claims, converting some to summary judgment based on a county personnel manual which designated Fitzgerald as an at-will employee. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of most claims, including those related to due process, intentional misrepresentation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, but reversed the dismissal of the false light invasion of privacy claim against Mayor Lawson, concluding the complaint sufficiently stated a prima facie case. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Employment terminationDue processGovernmental immunityFalse light invasion of privacyNegligent misrepresentationIntentional misrepresentationWorkplace harassmentAt-will employmentMotion to dismissSummary judgment
References
106
Case No. M2024-01006-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 2025

Virginia Dodson-Stephens v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County

The case involves an appeal from a lawsuit filed by Virginia Dodson-Stephens, individually and on behalf of her daughter Courtlynn Dodson, against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County and the State of Tennessee. Courtlynn sustained paralyzing injuries after jumping from a second-story window at W.A. Bass Learning Center, a public school. The trial court found both defendants negligent and equally at fault, awarding total compensatory damages of over $10 million, which was reduced to $600,000 due to statutory caps ($300,000 against each defendant). Metro appealed, raising issues regarding its duty of care, the foreseeability of the incident, and its responsibilities concerning Courtlynn's Individualized Education Program (IEP). The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision, finding that Metro breached its duty to supervise Courtlynn and failed to obtain and disseminate crucial information about her condition, making the injury foreseeable.

School NegligenceChild InjurySpecial Needs StudentEmotional DisturbanceIEP FailureLack of SupervisionForeseeability of HarmMental Health DiagnosisDepartment of Children's ServicesGovernmental Tort Liability Act
References
59
Case No. M2000-02455-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 06, 2003

Sylvester Young v. Nashville & Davidson County

Sylvester Young, a prisoner, alleged injury from a slip and fall in the Davidson County Jail and sued the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County for civil rights violations and negligence. The Chancery Court dismissed his civil rights claim, transferring the negligence claim to Circuit Court. After a bench trial, the Circuit Court dismissed the negligence claim, finding no sufficient proof of negligence or causation. The Court of Appeals affirmed this dismissal, concluding Young failed to prove any theory entitling him to relief.

Prisoner RightsNegligence ClaimSlip and Fall AccidentGovernmental LiabilityCivil Rights AllegationAppeals Court DecisionPro Se LitigationInsufficient EvidenceProximate CausePremise Liability
References
4
Case No. M2008-02060-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 2010

Dalton Reb Hughes and wife, Sandra Hines Hughes v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee

A Metro public works employee, Frank Archey, injured Dalton Reb Hughes, a Metro fire department employee, by negligently operating a front end loader. The incident, caused by a loud noise from the equipment, led Hughes to fall over a guardrail. Hughes sued Metro, which responded with a cross-claim against Archey and a counterclaim against Hughes for subrogation of payments. The trial court found Archey's actions negligent and within the scope of his employment, lifting Metro's immunity under the Governmental Tort Liability Act. It awarded Hughes $250,000, offset by $104,658.57 already paid by Metro. Metro appealed, arguing Archey acted intentionally and outside the scope of employment. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, agreeing that Archey's conduct was negligent and that the tort of assault in Tennessee requires an intent to harm, which was not established in this case.

Governmental Tort Liability ActScope of EmploymentNegligenceIntentional TortAssaultHorseplayPublic Employee LiabilityMotor Vehicle OperationPersonal InjuryMunicipal Immunity
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'Neil v. Roman Catholic Diocese

A student worker at St. Ephrem’s Church (the plaintiff) experienced sexual harassment from a visiting priest. After a particularly egregious incident, she informed other parish priests who promptly referred her to law enforcement. The plaintiff subsequently sued the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and St. Ephrem’s Church for sexual harassment, negligence, negligent hiring, and negligent supervision, arguing they should have known of the priest's propensity. The Supreme Court, Kings County, granted summary judgment to the Diocese defendants, dismissing the plaintiff's claims, finding they lacked actual or constructive knowledge. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding that the defendants met their burden in demonstrating no prior knowledge of the visiting priest's conduct and acted diligently once informed.

Sexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentNegligenceNegligent HiringNegligent SupervisionSummary JudgmentEmployer LiabilityConstructive KnowledgeDiscriminationNew York City Human Rights Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Health Acquisition Corp. v. Program Risk Management Inc.

The plaintiffs, home health care companies (Health Acquisition Corp., Bestcare, Inc., and Aides at Home, Inc.), sued various defendants, including accounting firm DeChants, Fuglein & Johnson, LLP (DFJ) and actuarial firm SGRisk, LLC, for professional negligence and negligent misrepresentation. The suit arose after the self-insurance trust they were members of became insolvent, leading to significant assessments from the Workers' Compensation Board. Plaintiffs alleged defendants concealed the trust's true financial state and their liability risks. The Supreme Court initially dismissed claims against DFJ and SGRisk. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, finding the complaint adequately alleged "near-privity" and negligence against both firms, even clarifying that actuaries could be held liable for common-law negligence despite not being licensed professionals for malpractice claims. A partial appeal concerning leave to amend the complaint was dismissed.

professional negligencenegligent misrepresentationCPLR 3211 (a)motion to dismissgroup self-insurance trustWorkers' Compensation Law § 50joint and several liabilityactuariesaccountantsnear-privity
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 5,452 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