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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lowe v. Lowe

Kerri Lowe appeals a default judgment in a divorce case from July 1996, where Jerome Jason Lowe was granted sole managing conservatorship of their children, child support, and a division of the marital estate. Mrs. Lowe's attorney, Greg Donnell, failed to appear for trial, having allegedly misled her about a continuance. The trial court denied Mrs. Lowe's motion for a new trial. The appellate court, applying the three-prong Craddock test for new trials after default judgments, found that Mrs. Lowe met all requirements: her failure to appear was due to an accident or mistake (her lawyer's misrepresentation), she presented a meritorious defense regarding child custody, and a new trial would not unduly delay or prejudice Mr. Lowe. Consequently, the court reversed the default judgment and remanded the case for a new trial. The opinion also critically discusses the appropriateness of the Craddock test in suits affecting the parent-child relationship.

Default judgmentNew trialCraddock testParent-child relationshipDivorce proceedingsChild custodyAttorney negligenceMisrepresentationAppellate reversalTexas law
References
20
Case No. 2019-08-0045
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 14, 2020

Mask, Michael v. Hub Group, Inc.

Employee Michael Mask, a truck driver, suffered a low back injury at work but was subsequently diagnosed with multiple myeloma. The employer, Hub Group, Inc., provided workers' compensation benefits for the back strain but denied further benefits for conditions related to his cancer, asserting it was not work-related. Mask sought additional medical and disability benefits, arguing his ongoing pain was connected to the work injury. The trial court, Judge Allen Phillips presiding, found Mask only established entitlement to benefits for his low back strain and not for temporary or permanent disability or cancer-related treatment, crediting Dr. Wolf's opinion that his pain stemmed from cancer. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding Mask was only entitled to reasonable and necessary future medical care for his low back strain, thereby denying benefits for cancer or additional disability.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryMultiple MyelomaCausationMedical BenefitsDisability BenefitsTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityAppeals BoardPro Se Litigant
References
5
Case No. 2021-08-0966
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 05, 2024

Woods, Lorene V. ST. FRANCIS SENIOR HEALTHCARE CENTER

Lorene Woods sought benefits for a neck condition and permanent disability related to a low-back strain sustained in June 2020 while working for St. Francis Senior Healthcare Center. While the low-back strain was compensable, the employer disputed the work-relatedness of the neck complaints. The Court found that Ms. Woods failed to provide expert medical opinion establishing causation for her neck condition and thus denied related benefits and future medical treatment. For the low-back injury, the Court determined she reached maximum medical improvement with a 0% impairment rating, denying permanent partial disability benefits. However, St. Francis was ordered to continue paying for reasonable and necessary medical treatment for the work-related low-back injury.

Workers' CompensationLow-back injuryNeck conditionCausationMedical treatmentPermanent partial disabilityMaximum Medical ImprovementDegenerative changesExpert medical opinionCredibility of witness
References
0
Case No. 2022-02-0200
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2023

Carden, Sean v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc.

The Court heard Mr. Carden's request for temporary disability and additional medical benefits, as well as attorney's fees and penalties. Mr. Carden, an employee of Lowe's, sustained a workplace injury in November 2021, leading to neck, shoulder, low back, and left leg pain. Lowe's denied subsequent temporary benefits, citing Mr. Carden's refusal of transitional work, and challenged coverage for back treatment due to a pre-existing degenerative condition. The Court found Mr. Carden's refusal of work offers justified, as they exceeded the restrictions of his authorized neurosurgeon, Dr. Austin. The Court also ruled that Mr. Carden's back condition was a compensable aggravation, agreeing with Dr. Austin that the work injury was a major contributing factor. Consequently, Lowe's was ordered to pay temporary total disability benefits and provide recommended medical treatment for Mr. Carden's neck and back, and the case was referred to the Compliance Program for potential penalty assessment.

Workers' CompensationTemporary DisabilityMedical BenefitsExpedited HearingWork RefusalPre-existing Condition AggravationSpinal InjuryNeck PainBack PainLumbar MRI
References
4
Case No. 2016-08-0701
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 07, 2017

Gueye, Kine v.Federal Express Corp.

Kine Gueye, an employee of Federal Express Corp., sustained a low back injury on April 9, 2015. Federal Express stipulated a compensable low back injury and agreed to provide reasonable medical treatment for it. However, the dispositive issue was whether Ms. Gueye's additional complaints of muscle weakness, paresthesia, dizziness, ataxia, and 'brain compression' causally related to this work injury and entitled her to additional medical and disability benefits. The authorized treating physician, Dr. Arsen Manugian, released Ms. Gueye at maximum medical improvement on June 25, 2015, with no restrictions, attributing her continued low back and leg pain to pre-existing spondylosis. Despite Ms. Gueye's testimony that these symptoms began after her fall, the court found insufficient medical evidence to establish a causal link to the work injury. Consequently, the court denied Ms. Gueye's request for additional medical and temporary or permanent disability benefits for these other complaints, affirming that she is only entitled to future medical treatment from Dr. Manugian for her work-related low back strain.

Workers' Compensation ClaimsCausation DisputeLumbar StrainPre-existing ConditionsMedical Opinion EvidenceDisability Benefits DenialExpedited Hearing OutcomeNeurological SymptomsWorkers' Compensation JudgeTennessee Labor Law
References
7
Case No. 2015-02-0179
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 20, 2017

Meier, Giovanna v. Lowes Home Centers, Inc.

Giovanna Meier, an employee of Lowes Home Centers, Inc., filed a claim for temporary and permanent disability benefits and medical benefits, alleging a work-related low-back injury from lifting concrete bags. Ms. Meier's claim was complicated by inconsistent reports about the injury's origin, including a separate incident at Dollar Tree, and difficulties with English communication. The court found that Ms. Meier failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained a work-related low-back injury arising primarily out of her employment. Furthermore, her attempt to present expert testimony regarding impairment failed due to inadmissible medical reports. Consequently, the Court denied Ms. Meier's claim for all requested workers' compensation benefits.

Workers' Compensation ClaimLow-Back InjuryKnee SprainCausation DisputeMedical Evidence AdmissibilityBurden of ProofPermanent Partial Disability BenefitsTemporary Total Disability BenefitsUnauthorized Medical TreatmentAverage Weekly Wage Calculation
References
5
Case No. 2-06-132-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 07, 2007

William Lowe, M.D. v. Mary Hernandez

Mary Hernandez, an employee of Calico Corners, sustained a work-related wrist injury and was treated by Dr. William Lowe. Dr. Lowe completed Texas Workers’ Compensation Work Status Reports (WSRs) throughout her recovery. Following a Functional Capacity Examination (FCE), Dr. Lowe mistakenly reported a permanent five-pound lifting restriction for Hernandez instead of fifty pounds, despite the FCE showing she could lift up to fifty pounds for some tasks. Calico Corners terminated Hernandez's employment based on this erroneous permanent restriction, as her job required lifting up to fifty pounds. Hernandez sued Dr. Lowe for negligence, claiming his misreporting and failure to correct the error caused her termination. A jury found Dr. Lowe 100% negligent, awarding Hernandez $179,589 in damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence of Dr. Lowe's negligence and rejecting his arguments regarding expert testimony, contributory negligence, and charge errors.

References
22
Case No. M2020-01480-CCA-R3-CD
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2022

State of Tennessee v. Joshua V. Lowe

Joshua V. Lowe appealed the Maury County Circuit Court's order of $52,000 in restitution, arguing the court failed to adequately consider his ability to pay during his six-year probationary sentence for theft. Lowe, an unemployed convicted felon, claimed his conviction significantly restricted his employment prospects in his prior fields of welding and coal mining, making the substantial restitution payments infeasible. However, the trial court had meticulously reviewed Lowe's financial history, including his prior high earnings and potential in cosmetology, concluding he possessed the capacity to pay the $723 monthly installments. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed this judgment, determining the trial court did not abuse its discretion, and highlighted Lowe's option to petition for restitution adjustment if his financial situation genuinely warranted it. This decision underscores the court's balance between victim compensation and the defendant's future earning potential.

TheftRestitutionProbationCriminal AppealAbility to PayAbuse of DiscretionPecuniary LossSentencingFelony ConvictionEmployment Limitations
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Green v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc.

Robert Green was terminated by Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc. for alleged sexual harassment after filing a workers' compensation claim for a hand injury. He sued Lowe's, arguing his termination was in retaliation for the workers' compensation claim and that the sexual harassment charges were a pretext. The trial court granted summary judgment for Lowe's. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that Green failed to raise a fact issue demonstrating a causal link between his workers' compensation claim and his termination. The court found no evidence of a negative attitude towards his injury, no failure to adhere to company policy by Lowe's, no less favorable treatment compared to similarly situated employees, and insufficient temporal proximity between the claim and termination.

Retaliatory dischargeWorkers' compensation claimSexual harassment policySummary judgment appealCausal linkPretextCircumstantial evidenceTemporal proximityEmployment lawWrongful termination
References
25
Case No. 2015-02-0179
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2016

Meier, Giovanna v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., et al.

The employee, Giovanna Meier, appealed a decision from the Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims, presided over by Judge Brian K. Addington. Meier alleged a back injury while working for Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc., but her claim was denied by the employer as not work-related. Following an expedited hearing, the trial court determined there was insufficient evidence to establish a causal link between the employment and the purported injury, a decision which Meier subsequently appealed. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's ruling, noting the absence of a complete record of testimony from the expedited hearing. Consistent with Tennessee law, the Appeals Board presumed the trial court's findings were supported by sufficient evidence, thus affirming its decision and remanding the case for any further necessary proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardInterlocutory AppealBack InjuryEmployment-related InjuryInsufficient EvidenceTrial Court DecisionAffirmed and RemandedPresumption of CorrectnessTennessee LawCausal Link
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 3,618 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