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. W2002-01394-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2003

Gregory Morris v. Shelby Co.

Plaintiff Gregory Morris, a jailer, sought on-the-job injury benefits after falling on an escalator and later experiencing severe knee pain following a shift requiring constant standing. He underwent surgeries on both knees, attributing the condition to the fall and subsequent work requirements. The trial court denied benefits, concluding that expert medical testimony failed to establish a causal link between his employment and the knee condition. On appeal, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's decision, giving greater weight to the treating physician's testimony, who found it 'unusual' for the fall to cause the condition, over another expert's conclusory statement.

On-the-job injuryWorkers' compensationCausationMedical testimonyAggravation of injuryKnee injuryEscalator fallSheriff's departmentJailerExpert witness
References
8
Case No. W2005-02083-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 11, 2006

Debra Owens v. Shelby County Government

The plaintiff, Debra Owens, a jailer for Shelby County Government, sued for on-the-job injury benefits after a slip-and-fall accident caused a back injury. Initially, her treating physician, Dr. Riley Jones, released her with no permanent disability and capable of unrestricted work, leading the county to cease benefits. Later, another physician, Dr. Rommel Childress, opined she had a 6% permanent disability to her body as a whole due to the accident. The trial court found no permanent vocational disability and ruled in favor of the county, a decision Owens appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the evidence did not preponderate against the finding of no vocational disability.

on-the-job injuryvocational disabilityanatomical impairmentslip-and-fallback injurypermanent partial disabilitymedical testimonycredibility determinationappellate reviewTennessee law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Matagorda County, Texas

Christopher Jordan, an African-American sheriff's deputy-jailer, sued Matagorda County, Texas, and Sheriff James Mitchell under Title VII for racial discrimination and retaliation. Jordan experienced racist comments and increased discipline, including a suspension, after a supervisor's promotion. Following Jordan's EEOC complaint, he was fired based on allegations of providing alcohol to inmates, a situation handled disparately compared to a white deputy accused of similar conduct. The court granted summary judgment for Matagorda County on Title VII claims, ruling it was not Jordan's employer. However, the court denied summary judgment for Sheriff Mitchell on Jordan's Title VII retaliation claim, finding a genuine issue of material fact regarding the pretextual nature of his termination. All other claims were dismissed.

Title VIIRetaliationRacial DiscriminationSummary JudgmentEmployment LawDisparate TreatmentOfficial CapacityMatagorda CountySheriff DepartmentEEOC Complaint
References
45
Case No. 12-1047
Regular Panel Decision

Amos v. McNairy County

Plaintiff Serfin Amos, a black male and former correctional officer, sued McNairy County, Tennessee, and its Sheriff's Department for alleged violations of Title VII, the Tennessee Human Rights Act, and the Tennessee Public Protection Act. Amos claimed race discrimination related to wage disparity, demotion to jailer, probation, and failure to promote, as well as retaliation for filing an EEOC charge and whistleblowing under the TPPA. The court granted summary judgment to the defendant on all race discrimination claims, finding insufficient evidence to support these assertions. However, the court denied summary judgment on the retaliation claim, determining that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the County's stated reasons for Amos's termination. The TPPA claim was also dismissed due to failure to establish a prima facie case.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VII Civil Rights ActTennessee Human Rights ActTennessee Public Protection ActRetaliation ClaimSummary JudgmentRace DiscriminationWrongful TerminationFailure to PromoteWage Disparity
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 04, 2019

Rasberry ex rel. Situated v. Columbia Cnty.

This order addresses Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine, seeking to exclude various categories of evidence in a case concerning alleged overtime violations under the FLSA. The Court granted several of Plaintiffs' requests, including those related to prior civil lawsuits, bankruptcies, other jailers not part of the suit, other employment, alleged waivers of FLSA rights, attorneys' fees, settlement offers, and general negative impacts of lawsuits. However, the Court denied requests concerning references to past criminal convictions (without prejudice), employment by the Defendant outside the relevant period (without prejudice), disciplinary actions (without prejudice), and the amount of Plaintiffs' salaries. The Court also denied the request regarding the jury's role in mathematically computing damages, stating it would be addressed in jury instructions. The overall decision was granted in part and denied in part.

Motion in LimineEvidence ExclusionOvertime ViolationsFLSAFair Labor Standards ActCredibilityUndue PrejudiceIrrelevant EvidenceJury ConfusionDamages Calculation
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 01, 2004

Thomas v. Long

Jeanne Long, a former Harris County jailer, was reinstated by the Harris County Sheriffs Department Civil Service Commission after her termination. However, the Department required her to complete a physical ability test before returning to work, which Long refused. She then filed suit in state district court against Sheriff Tommy Thomas, seeking a declaratory judgment that she was entitled to return without the test. The district court partially ruled in Long's favor, implicitly denying the Sheriff's jurisdictional challenge. The court of appeals dismissed the Sheriff's interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the court of appeals did have jurisdiction and that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Long's reinstatement claims because she failed to exhaust her administrative remedies with the Commission regarding the physical test requirement. Consequently, Long's reinstatement claims were dismissed.

Interlocutory AppealSubject Matter JurisdictionExhaustion of Administrative RemediesGovernmental UnitPlea to the JurisdictionSummary JudgmentDeclaratory JudgmentMandamusCivil Service SystemEmployment Law
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

ESIS, Inc., Servicing Contractor v. Johnson

This is a workers’ compensation case involving Billy Carl Johnson, a jailer for the Tarrant County Sheriff’s Department, who sustained an accidental gunshot injury while cleaning his service revolver at home. The Texas Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel determined that the injury occurred in the course and scope of his employment, a finding subsequently affirmed by a jury in the district court. ESIS, Inc., the servicing contractor for Tarrant County’s self-insured policy, appealed this decision, raising four points of error. These included claims that Johnson was not within the course and scope of his employment, challenges to the admission of the appeals panel opinion, the exclusion of evidence regarding Johnson's alcohol consumption, and the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission's intervention in the case. The Chief Justice overruled all points of error, concluding that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding that Johnson’s injury was sustained in the course and scope of his employment, and affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Workers' CompensationCourse and Scope of EmploymentAccidental InjuryFirearmJailerAppellate ReviewAdministrative LawEvidence AdmissibilityStatutory InterpretationIntoxication Defense
References
34
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
Showing 1-8 of 8 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