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. W2013-00535-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Charles Haynes v. Formac Stables, Inc.

The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of Charles Haynes' retaliatory discharge claims against Formac Stables, Inc. Haynes alleged he was fired for complaining to the owner about a forced, improper medical treatment involving horse sutures for a head injury. The central issue was whether an employee must report illegal activity to someone other than the wrongdoer to qualify as a whistleblower, even if the wrongdoer is the manager or owner. The Court held that to qualify as a whistleblower, an employee must report illegal activity to an entity other than the wrongdoer, which may necessitate reporting to an outside agency in situations where the wrongdoer holds the highest authority within the company. Consequently, as Haynes reported solely to Formac's owner, he did not satisfy the reporting requirement for a whistleblower claim. The Court overruled prior conflicting precedents.

WhistleblowerRetaliatory DischargeEmployment-at-WillInternal ReportingPublic PolicyWrongdoerTennessee LawStatutory InterpretationPublic Protection ActEmployee Rights
References
20
Case No. M2012-02423-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Williams v. City of Burns

Plaintiff Captain Larry D. Williams was discharged by the City of Burns after reporting his police chief, Jerry D. Sumerour, Jr., for pressuring him into illegally fixing a traffic ticket for the chief's stepson. The defendant municipality claimed Williams was terminated for violating the chain of command and undermining the chief's authority. The Tennessee Supreme Court found that disciplining Williams for reporting illegal activity to the mayor was an admission of retaliatory motive and that other reasons for termination were pretextual. The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, concluding Williams was discharged solely in retaliation for refusing to participate in and remain silent about illegal activities under the Tennessee Public Protection Act.

Retaliatory DischargeWhistleblower ProtectionIllegal Ticket FixingChain of Command ViolationPolice Officer TerminationEmployment At-WillPublic Policy ExceptionPretext for RetaliationCausation in Employment LawMunicipal Employment
References
78
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 1990

Winters v. Houston Chronicle Publishing Co.

Richard Winters, an at-will employee, was terminated by Houston Chronicle Publishing Company after he internally reported alleged illegal activities by fellow employees, including false subscriber reporting, inventory theft, and a kickback scheme. He subsequently filed a wrongful discharge lawsuit. The trial court initially granted summary judgment against Winters, a decision upheld by the court of appeals, on the grounds that his pleadings did not establish a cause of action. The Texas Supreme Court affirmed this judgment, declining to establish a new common law exception to the state's long-standing at-will employment doctrine for private employees who report illegal activities to management. The Court noted that Winters' situation did not align with existing statutory protections or prior judicial exceptions.

Wrongful dischargeAt-will employmentWhistleblowerReporting illegal activitiesSummary judgmentTexas employment lawCommon law exceptionsStatutory exceptionsPublic policy exceptionEmployee rights
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 10, 1997

Mason v. Seaton

This Tennessee Supreme Court case reviews a retaliatory discharge claim brought by employee Maxine O. Mason against her employers, Kenneth M. and Laurel Seaton. Mason was fired after reporting fire safety violations and locked exit doors at the defendants' hotel to city officials. The trial court initially dismissed the complaint, requiring proof that the employer explicitly directed the employee to remain silent. However, the Court of Appeals reversed this, and the Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the "whistleblower" statute (Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-1-304) does not require an employer to have expressly forbidden the employee from reporting illegal activities for a retaliatory discharge claim to stand. The Court found sufficient evidence of illegal activity and a causal link between Mason's report and her termination.

Retaliatory DischargeWhistleblower ProtectionEmployment LawSummary JudgmentPublic PolicyFire SafetyEmployee RightsTennessee Supreme CourtStatutory InterpretationWrongful Termination
References
16
Case No. 03-06-00002-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 20, 2007

Texas Court Reporters Certification Board and Michele Henricks, as Director of the Court Reporters Certification Board v. Esquire Deposition Services, L.L.C.

The Texas Court Reporters Certification Board (Board) initiated disciplinary proceedings against Esquire Deposition Services, L.L.C. (Esquire) for alleged violations concerning long-term volume discount arrangements for court reporting services. Esquire subsequently filed suit against the Board and its director, Michele Henricks, challenging the Board's statutory authority to regulate or prohibit such discounts and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court denied the Board's plea to the jurisdiction, prompting an appeal. The Court of Appeals held that the Board possesses exclusive jurisdiction over disciplinary claims and determined that Esquire's claims, which broadly questioned the Board's general authority over long-term discounts, were not ripe for judicial review as they depended on contingent facts and agency expertise. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the district court's order, dismissing Esquire's suit due to lack of jurisdiction.

Administrative LawJurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionRipeness DoctrineExclusive JurisdictionStatutory InterpretationDeclaratory Judgment ActCourt Reporters Certification BoardCourt Reporting FirmsLong-term Volume Discounts
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hugo v. Millennium Laboratories, Inc.

The plaintiff sued his former employer, Millennium Laboratories, alleging wrongful termination based on whistleblower retaliation, violation of public policy, and age discrimination under Tennessee law. The plaintiff claimed he was discharged for attempting to report illegal LSA activities, for potential testimony in a Colorado lawsuit, and due to his age. Millennium contended the termination was solely due to the plaintiff's poor job performance and dishonesty, citing multiple customer complaints and an instance of dishonesty. The Court granted Millennium's motion for summary judgment, concluding the plaintiff failed to present a prima facie case or show pretext for any of his claims, as he did not sufficiently report illegal activities, there was no evidence Millennium impeded his testimony, and age was not the 'but for' cause of termination.

Age DiscriminationWhistleblower RetaliationWrongful TerminationSummary JudgmentTennessee Public Protection ActTennessee Human Rights ActEmployment LawPublic Policy ViolationJob PerformancePretext Argument
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wilson v. Dallas Independent School District

Stephen Wilson, a former teacher for Dallas Independent School District (DISD), appealed the trial court's judgment which granted DISD’s plea to the jurisdiction and motion for summary judgment, dismissing Wilson’s Whistleblower Act cause of action. Wilson alleged he was coerced by assistant principals into illegally changing a student athlete's grade to maintain the student’s eligibility for extracurricular activities, a violation of the 'no pass, no play' rule and other statutes. He reported these alleged violations to school board members, an area superintendent, DISD’s Office of Professional Responsibility, the District Attorney’s office, and the University Interscholastic League. Following his reports, Wilson claims his class was eliminated, he was reprimanded, received a negative performance evaluation, and was denied interviews at other DISD schools, leading to a lower-paying position in another district. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, concluding that Wilson failed to report a violation of law as defined by the Whistleblower Act because his reports did not assert the student actually participated in extracurricular activities while ineligible, and his arguments regarding other statutes were not properly preserved for appeal in the trial court.

Whistleblower Protection ActGovernmental ImmunityPublic EmployeeGrade TamperingExtracurricular EligibilityNo Pass No Play RuleTexas Education CodeTexas Penal CodeSubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lawson v. Adams

This case concerns a wrongful discharge lawsuit filed by Lester Mitchell Lawson, III against his former employer, Anthony Adams. Lawson alleged he was unlawfully terminated for refusing to participate in or remain silent about illegal activities, specifically operating unsafe equipment. The Trial Court initially granted summary judgment to Adams, ruling that Lawson failed to report the activities to an entity other than Adams. On appeal, the court affirmed the summary judgment regarding the 'refusal to remain silent' claim, maintaining the requirement for external reporting. However, it vacated the summary judgment on the 'refusal to participate' claim, asserting that no such reporting requirement exists. The appellate court found that Lawson's allegations, if true, sufficiently established a violation of public policy related to motor vehicle safety regulations.

Retaliatory DischargeWhistleblower ActUnsafe Working ConditionsSummary JudgmentPublic Policy ViolationRefusal to Participate in Illegal ActivityRefusal to Remain Silent about Illegal ActivityTennessee Court of AppealsMotor Vehicle SafetyEmployer Responsibility
References
23
Case No. 14-12-00991-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Joseph Peine v. HIT Services L.P., Wood Group USA, Inc., John Wood Group PLC, Wood Group Power GP, LLC and Wood Group Management Services, Inc.

Joseph Peiner, a former CFO, sued his employer and related entities for wrongful termination, alleging he was fired for refusing to commit a crime (inflating profits). The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the appellees. On appeal, Peiner argued there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether his refusal was the sole cause of his termination, as required by the Sabine Pilot exception to the employment-at-will doctrine. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, finding that the evidence conclusively proved Peiner was terminated, at least in part, for breaching his confidentiality duties by sending company documents to a reporter. The court rejected Peiner's arguments, emphasizing that Sabine Pilot requires the illegal act refusal to be the sole cause of termination and does not protect employees for reporting illegal activities.

Wrongful TerminationEmployment LawSabine Pilot ExceptionSummary JudgmentConfidentiality BreachWhistleblower ProtectionRetaliatory DischargeTexas Appellate CourtCorporate GovernanceFinancial Misconduct
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Moskal v. First Tennessee Bank

The plaintiff initiated a retaliatory discharge action, alleging termination from her employment for refusing to falsify documents for the Tennessee Student Assistance Corporation and for reporting illegal student loan activities to the F.B.I. The trial court initially granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, upholding the employee-at-will doctrine. However, the appellate court reviewed established precedents, including *Clanton v. Cain-Sloan Co.* and *Watson v. Cleveland Chair Co.*, which recognize a public policy exception to the at-will rule. This exception applies when an employee is terminated solely for refusing to participate in, or remain silent about, illegal activities. Concluding that the plaintiff's complaint properly raised this issue, the appellate court reversed the trial court's summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Retaliatory DischargeEmployee-at-Will DoctrineWhistleblower ProtectionIllegal ActivitiesSummary Judgment ReversalAppellate ReviewPublic Policy ExceptionStudent Loan FraudFalsification of RecordsTennessee Employment Law
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 7,782 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