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. M2007-01799-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 2008

In Re Estate of Lucille Ray Heirs of Howard Ray v. Magdalene Long and Joshua (Josh) Todd Crews

This case involves a will contest concerning the estate of Lucille Ray. The heirs of her predeceased son, Howard Ray, challenged her will, alleging it was procured through undue influence by her daughters, Magdalene Long and Joyce Hess, who were beneficiaries. After a jury trial, the jury found that the will was not a product of undue influence and was valid. The son's children appealed, arguing a presumption of undue influence due to a confidential relationship between Magdalene Long and Lucille Ray. The Court of Appeals affirmed the jury's verdict, concluding that material evidence supported the finding and that any presumption of undue influence was rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, including independent advice from the drafting attorney.

Will ContestUndue InfluenceTestamentary CapacityConfidential RelationshipJury VerdictAppellate ReviewMaterial EvidencePresumption of Undue InfluenceIndependent AdviceEstate Law
References
12
Case No. M2002-02208-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 2004

In Re: UpperCumberland Development District, Conservator for Alvie Puckett, Gloria Evins v. Helen Puckett

Administrator Ad Litem Gloria Jean Evins appealed the trial court's decision regarding the competency and alleged undue influence over Alvie Puckett when he executed a deed of real property to his daughter, Helen Puckett. Alvie Puckett sustained a severe head injury in 1989 and later developed dementia. The estate sought to invalidate the deed, arguing he was incompetent and unduly influenced at the time of execution. The trial court found Alvie Puckett competent and not unduly influenced. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's findings, noting the lack of contemporary medical evaluations directly addressing Alvie Puckett's mental state at the time of the transaction. The court also found no evidence to establish a confidential relationship or direct undue influence by Helen Puckett.

CompetencyUndue InfluenceDeed ValidityProperty ConveyanceMental CapacityDementiaSkull FractureFiduciary RelationshipAppellate ReviewStandard of Review
References
8
Case No. E2020-00723-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 10, 2021

Hunter Ryan Ellis v. Christina L. Duggan

This case involves an appeal concerning allegations of undue influence in a gift of $176,000 from the decedent, Jean Ellis, to her niece, Christina L. Duggan. The plaintiffs, Jean's grandsons and residuary beneficiaries, claimed Christina, who held power of attorney for Jean, exerted undue influence over her. The trial court found a confidential relationship and multiple suspicious circumstances, leading to a judgment against Christina for $176,000, but denied attorney fees. The appellate court affirmed the finding of undue influence and the judgment against Christina, reversing the denial of attorney fees and remanding for a determination of a reasonable award.

Undue InfluenceFiduciary DutyPower of Attorney AbuseGift TransactionElder AbuseEstate PlanningBreach of Fiduciary DutyConfidential RelationshipAppellate ReviewAttorney Fees
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kelley v. Johns

This case involves an intra-family dispute over the validity of Porter B. Johns, Sr.'s will, which left his farm to one of his nine children, Mahlon Johns. Six of the decedent's other children contested the will in Maury County, alleging lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence by Mahlon Johns. A jury found that a confidential relationship existed and the will was procured by undue influence, leading to its invalidation. Mahlon Johns's estate appealed the judgment, arguing insufficient evidence for the jury's findings. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the record contained material evidence to support the jury's verdict regarding the confidential relationship and undue influence.

Undue InfluenceTestamentary CapacityConfidential RelationshipWill ContestElder AbuseFamily DisputeProbate LawAppellate ReviewJury VerdictMaterial Evidence
References
37
Case No. W2017-00551-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 28, 2017

In Re: Last Will and Testament of Mary Theresse Erde

This case is a will contest concerning the holographic will of Mary Theresse Erde. Appellant Carl Barton challenged the will, claiming lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence by Beneficiary Deborah Lawson. The trial court denied Barton's motion to set aside the order admitting the will to probate and found that Decedent possessed testamentary capacity and that the presumption of undue influence was rebutted by clear and convincing evidence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding no abuse of discretion in striking Barton's amended counter-petition due to futility and upholding the findings regarding testamentary capacity and the rebuttal of undue influence through independent legal advice and lack of suspicious circumstances.

Will contestHolographic willTestamentary capacityUndue influenceConfidential relationshipIndependent legal adviceFutility of amendmentRule 15.01 Tennessee Civil ProcedureRule 60.02 Tennessee Civil ProcedureAppellate review
References
60
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kastor v. Sam's Wholesale Club

Plaintiff William A. Kastor sued Sam’s Wholesale Club for unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Kastor, a bakery department manager, argued he was not exempt from overtime requirements as he spent most of his time on non-managerial tasks. Sam's contended that Kastor was an executive or administrative employee, thus exempt under FLSA regulations. The court applied the FLSA 'short test' for executive exemption, finding Kastor's primary duty was management of the bakery department, despite his claims of time spent on non-managerial duties. The court considered the importance of his managerial tasks, his exercise of discretion, and his supervision of other employees. The court granted Sam’s Wholesale Club’s Motion for Summary Judgment, dismissing the action with prejudice, concluding that Kastor was an exempt executive employee.

overtime compensationFair Labor Standards ActFLSAexecutive exemptionadministrative exemptionsummary judgmentprimary dutymanagementbakery departmentwage and hour
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 19, 1992

Stat Medical Services, Inc. v. Daughters of Jacob Geriatric Center, Inc.

Plaintiff Stat Medical Services, Inc. sued Daughters of Jacob Geriatric Center, Inc. for $123,770.11 in unpaid invoices for temporary nursing services. DOJ conceded liability but raised an affirmative defense of commercial bribery under New York Penal Law § 180.00, alleging STAT hired DOJ's office manager, Marcia Alexander, without DOJ's consent and with intent to influence her conduct. The court found that while STAT conferred a benefit on Alexander by employing her without DOJ's consent, DOJ failed to prove the crucial third element: STAT's intent to influence Alexander's conduct. The court emphasized that the mere fact of secret employment does not automatically establish intent to influence, and defendant did not provide clear and convincing evidence. Therefore, the affirmative defense and counterclaim failed, and judgment was entered for the plaintiff for the unpaid invoices plus prejudgment interest, totaling $147,468.81.

Commercial BriberyNew York Penal LawAffirmative DefenseIntent to InfluenceBurden of ProofClear and Convincing EvidenceTemporary Nursing ServicesUnpaid InvoicesEmployment LawContract Dispute
References
8
Case No. C-5672, E-2429, C-5878
Regular Panel Decision

Buffalo United Charter School v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

Petitioners, consisting of Buffalo United Charter School, Brooklyn Excelsior Charter School, and National Heritage Academies, Inc., initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge and annul a February 14, 2011 decision by the New York Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). The PERB decision asserted jurisdiction over the charter schools, rejected National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preemption claims, and determined that assistant principals were neither managerial nor confidential employees. Petitioners contended that PERB lacked jurisdiction due to its joint public-private employment doctrine, that the NLRA preempted PERB's authority, and that PERB erroneously found the assistant principals lacked managerial or confidential status. They also argued the PERB decision unconstitutionally impaired their contractual rights. The court largely upheld PERB's jurisdiction, ruling that the Charter Schools Act superseded PERB's joint public-private employment doctrine and denying the NLRA preemption claim. However, the court annulled PERB's determination regarding the managerial and confidential status of assistant principals at Brooklyn Excelsior Charter School, reinstating the Administrative Law Judge's original finding on that specific issue.

Charter SchoolsPublic Employment Relations Board (PERB)Taylor LawNational Labor Relations Act (NLRA)JurisdictionJoint Public-Private Employment DoctrineManagerial EmployeesConfidential EmployeesCollective BargainingCPLR Article 78
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Estate of Panek

Theodore (Ted) Panek's will, which bequeathed a significant portion of his estate to the proponent, was challenged by eight objectants on grounds of undue influence. A jury in Surrogate’s Court found that while Ted had testamentary capacity, he was subjected to undue influence by the proponent, leading to the denial of probate. On appeal, the court affirmed the Surrogate’s decree. The appellate court found ample circumstantial evidence to support the jury's finding, noting the proponent's financial motive, her control over Ted's environment and finances, his fragile health, and her active efforts to isolate him and pressure him into making the will against his prior resistance.

Will ContestUndue InfluenceTestamentary CapacityProbate LawEstate AdministrationAppellate ReviewSurrogate's CourtCircumstantial EvidenceFiduciary RelationshipElder Abuse
References
9
Case No. M2000-03191-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 02, 2001

Arthur L. Rawlings, Jr. v. The John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company

This appeal concerns a dispute over a $12,000 life insurance policy between the estranged husband and brother of the deceased, Eleanor Rawlings. Arthur L. Rawlings, Jr. initially sued after Eleanor changed the beneficiary from him to her brother, Darden Holt. The Circuit Court for Davidson County ruled in favor of Mr. Rawlings, finding Eleanor lacked mental capacity and was subjected to undue influence by Mr. Holt. The Court of Appeals, however, reversed this decision, concluding that the evidence did not support findings of lack of capacity or undue influence. The case was remanded with directions to award the life insurance proceeds to Darden Holt.

Mental CapacityUndue InfluenceLife Insurance BeneficiaryContract LawAppellate ReviewBurden of ProofContractual CapacitySenile DementiaDepressionPower of Attorney
References
62
Showing 1-10 of 284 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