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. 09-0941
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 2011

Service Corporation International and Sci Texas Funeral Services, Inc., D/B/A Mont Meta Memorial Park v. Juanita G. Guerra, Julie Ann Ramirez, Gracie Little and Mary Esther Martinez

The case involves Service Corporation International and SCI Texas Funeral Services, Inc., which operated Mont Meta Memorial Park, burying Marcos Guerra in a plot previously sold to another party. Despite the family's refusal, the cemetery disinterred and moved Mr. Guerra's body. His widow, Juanita G. Guerra, and daughters sued both corporations for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and trespass. The Supreme Court of Texas found insufficient evidence to support the liability findings against SCI International and the mental anguish damages awarded to the daughters. The Court also ruled that the trial court improperly admitted evidence of other lawsuits. Consequently, the judgment was reversed and rendered in part, and Mrs. Guerra's claim against SCI Texas was remanded for a new trial.

Cemetery DisputeWrongful DisintermentMental Anguish DamagesCorporate VeilVicarious LiabilityEvidentiary ErrorIrrelevant EvidenceOther Acts EvidencePunitive DamagesTexas Supreme Court
References
32
Case No. 13-10-00498-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 11, 2012

Service Corporation International and Sci Texas Funeral Services, Inc. v. Leticia Leal

This case involved an appeal from a trial court judgment that found Service Corporation International and SCI Texas Funeral Services, Inc. liable for fraud concerning burial plots. The appellees, families of Rodolfo Garza and Charles Rogers, alleged fraud and sought damages for mental anguish. The jury found fraud but also found that most appellees had not filed within the four-year statute of limitations, a finding the trial court disregarded. On appeal, the Thirteenth District Court of Texas reversed and rendered judgment in favor of the appellants, concluding that all claims except Leticia Leal's were barred by limitations and that there was legally insufficient evidence for mental anguish damages for most appellees. Consequently, the awards for actual and exemplary damages were also reversed.

Fraudulent ConcealmentDiscovery RuleStatute of LimitationsMental Anguish DamagesExemplary DamagesBurial DisputesCemetery PracticesCorporate LiabilityTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeAppellate Procedure
References
25
Case No. 98-CV-4079, 98-CV-4081
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 22, 1999

Hughes v. Internal Revenue Service

Plaintiffs Ramon and Nazzari Hughes sued the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and its agent Lawrence R. Engel, alleging a wrongful levy on their bank account, asserting that the seized funds were exempt Social Security Disability payments. Defendants, the United States of America and the IRS, moved to dismiss the actions for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. The court granted the motion to dismiss, ruling that claims under Internal Revenue Code sections 6334(a)(10), 6334(a)(11), and 6334(b)(3) were dismissed with prejudice, as the exemption for 'payable' amounts did not apply to funds already paid into a bank account. Claims related to due process and IRC sections 7432 and 7433 were dismissed without prejudice, allowing for repleading. Ultimately, the entire case was dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute after the plaintiffs failed to file amended complaints within the court's specified timeframe.

Federal Tax DisputeWrongful LevySovereign ImmunityMotion to DismissStatutory InterpretationSocial Security DisabilityDue ProcessIRSInternal Revenue Code Section 6334Internal Revenue Code Section 7432
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

AMR Services Corp. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Plaintiff AMR Services Corporation sought a preliminary injunction against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and its Local 851 and Airline Division, alleging illegal picketing at J.F.K. International Airport. AMR contended the picketing violated the Railway Labor Act by aiming for representational and organizational purposes among AMR's employees. The defendant unions argued their actions were legitimate, primarily protesting Korean Air Lines' contract termination with Triangle Aviation Services and publicizing AMR's alleged substandard wages, not to organize AMR employees. The court found no objective evidence of a present purpose by the unions to seek recognition of AMR employees, distinguishing the case from precedents involving explicit organizational efforts. Consequently, the court concluded that no "dispute" over representation existed under the Railway Labor Act, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act barred the injunction, leading to its denial.

Labour disputeRailway Labor ActNational Labor Relations ActNorris-LaGuardia ActPicketingUnion representationArea standardsPreliminary injunctionCollective bargainingFederal labor law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Adamowicz v. Internal Revenue Service

Plaintiffs Michael Adamowicz and Elizabeth Fraser, acting as executors of the Estate of Mary Adamowicz, filed an action under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). They sought to compel the production of documents withheld by the IRS, related to three FOIA requests made in December 2005 and April 2007 concerning the IRS's examination of their mother's Estate and ensuing legal disputes. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The Court found that the IRS's searches for responsive documents were adequate and that the withheld documents fell within FOIA exemptions, specifically Exemption 2 (internal agency information), Exemption 3 (statutory exemptions under I.R.C. § 6103), Exemption 5 (privileges like deliberative process, attorney-client, and work-product), Exemption 6 (personnel and medical information), and Exemption 7 (law enforcement purposes, including invasion of privacy and confidential sources). Consequently, the Government's motion for summary judgment was GRANTED, and Plaintiffs' motion was DENIED.

FOIA ExemptionsIRS DisclosureTaxation LitigationAgency Search AdequacyDeliberative ProcessAttorney Work-ProductConfidentiality AssuranceSummary Judgment MotionGovernment Information ActPrivacy Interests
References
49
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smoky Mountain Secrets, Inc. v. United States

This case involves a tax refund action brought by Smoky Mountain Secrets, Inc. (SMS) against the United States Department of the Treasury through the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regarding FICA and FUTA taxes. SMS contended that its telemarketers and delivery persons were erroneously classified as employees for federal tax purposes, arguing they qualified as "direct sellers" under 26 U.S.C. § 3508. The court found that SMS's sales force met the requirements of "direct sellers" due to their commission-based remuneration, sales activities, and written contracts disclaiming employee status. Additionally, the court concluded that SMS was entitled to relief under Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978, having demonstrated a reasonable basis for treating its workers as independent contractors by relying on professional advice from two certified public accountants. Consequently, the court awarded judgment in favor of SMS for a refund of $400 in employment taxes.

Tax refundFICA taxesFUTA taxesIndependent contractorsDirect sellers26 U.S.C. § 3508Section 530 Revenue Act of 1978Reasonable basisProfessional adviceCPA reliance
References
16
Case No. Shelby Chancery No. 107732 C.A. No. 02A01-9704-CH-00074
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 24, 1997

Doris Bridges v. Margaret Culpepper

Doris J. Bridges appealed the denial of unemployment compensation benefits by the Board of Review of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security, a decision upheld by the chancery court. Bridges voluntarily retired from the Internal Revenue Service under an early retirement program after 22 years of service. Her claim for benefits was denied on the grounds that she voluntarily quit without good cause connected to her work, and she did not qualify for statutory exceptions regarding "lack of work" or "labor-management contract or agreement." The Court of Appeals affirmed the chancery court's judgment, finding substantial and material evidence supporting the Board's conclusion that there was no lack of work at the IRS and that the early retirement offer was not a collective bargaining agreement. The court also found no error in the Board's refusal to consider new evidence due to the appellant's lack of diligence.

Unemployment CompensationVoluntary Early RetirementGood Cause for Leaving EmploymentLack of Work ExceptionLabor-Management ContractAdministrative ReviewSubstantial EvidenceMaterial EvidenceDenial of BenefitsDue Diligence
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lansden v. Marsh

This case addresses the constitutionality of taxing Social Security benefits. Plaintiffs challenged the Internal Revenue Service's imposition and collection of a tax on their 1992 Social Security benefits, arguing it violated the United States Constitution's prohibition against direct taxes without apportionment, the doctrine of intergovernmental tax immunity, and was unconstitutionally vague. The Court granted the Defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied the Plaintiffs' cross-motion. It held that Social Security benefits are an "accession to wealth" and thus taxable income under the Sixteenth Amendment, not a return of property. The Court also rejected the intergovernmental tax immunity argument, finding no implied contract, and determined that the relevant tax statute was not void for vagueness.

TaxationSocial Security BenefitsIncome TaxDirect TaxApportionmentSixteenth AmendmentIntergovernmental Tax ImmunityVoid for Vagueness DoctrineSummary JudgmentConstitutional Law
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Service Corp. International v. Guerra

Marcos Guerra was improperly buried in a previously sold plot. Despite family refusal, SCI Texas Funeral Services, Inc., operating Mont Meta Memorial Park, disinterred and moved his body. His widow and daughters sued SCI Texas and its parent, Service Corporation International, alleging emotional distress, negligence, and trespass. The Supreme Court of Texas found insufficient evidence for SCI International's liability and the daughters' mental anguish, and ruled other lawsuit evidence inadmissible. The judgment was partially reversed, with Mrs. Guerra's claim against SCI Texas remanded for a new trial.

Cemetery NegligenceDisinterment of RemainsMental Anguish DamagesCorporate LiabilityVicarious LiabilitySufficiency of EvidenceEvidentiary ErrorPunitive DamagesMotion in LimineSpoliation of Evidence
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Radcliffe v. Internal Revenue Service

Plaintiff Joseph Radcliffe brought an action under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to compel disclosure of documents related to an ongoing tax investigation into his offshore credit card accounts. The IRS withheld certain documents, citing FOIA exemptions (b)(3) in conjunction with 26 U.S.C. § 6103, and (b)(7)(A) and (b)(7)(C) for law enforcement purposes. Radcliffe challenged the adequacy of the IRS's search and the applicability of the exemptions. The court found that the IRS conducted an adequate search and that the withheld documents constituted 'return information' compiled for legitimate law enforcement purposes. The court concluded that disclosure of these documents would interfere with federal tax administration by revealing the nature, scope, and evidence of the ongoing investigation. Consequently, the defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted, and the court denied the plaintiff's request for an in camera review.

FOIAIRS InvestigationTax EvasionOffshore AccountsSummary JudgmentDisclosure ExemptionsLaw EnforcementFederal Tax AdministrationReturn InformationCivil Examination
References
37
Showing 1-10 of 10,280 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