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

John R. Wills, Jr. v. The City of Memphis

John R. Wills, Jr., sought to subdivide his property, Lot 94, in the Belle Meade Subdivision into two lots, but his application was denied by the Memphis and Shelby County Land Use Control Board and the Memphis City Council. Wills subsequently filed a petition for writ of certiorari, leading the Chancery Court of Shelby County to reverse the City Council's decision and remand the case for a rehearing. The City of Memphis and the Memphis City Council appealed this decision. The appellate court identified an ambiguity in the Unified Development Code (UDC) regarding the applicability of "contextual infill development standards" (Section 3.9.2) to Wills' property, specifically concerning the definition of "development" in the context of surrounding properties established before 1950. The court concluded that the trial court's ruling, which stated Wills' application complied with all UDC provisions, was premature. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed in part and vacated in part the trial court's order, remanding the case for further proceedings to the City Council to definitively interpret and apply UDC Section 3.9.2(B)(1) based on the existing record.

ZoningSubdivision RegulationsLand Use ControlUnified Development Code (UDC)Administrative ReviewWrit of CertiorariAppellate ReviewArbitrary and Capricious DecisionStatutory InterpretationRemand Order
References
44
Case No. W2004-00024-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 28, 2004

Roy L. Tidwell v. City of Memphis

This case originated from a dispute where thirteen firefighters and one police officer, employees of the City of Memphis, filed claims for on-the-job injury benefits. The City's On-the-Job Injury (OJI) Appeals Panel denied these claims. The employees appealed to the Chancery Court of Shelby County, which reversed the panel's decision, concluding that the OJI Appeals Panel's proceedings were subject to the Tennessee Uniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA) and judicial review should conform to UAPA standards. The City of Memphis appealed to the Court of Appeals, arguing that the OJI Appeals Panel is not a 'civil service board' and thus not governed by UAPA. The Court of Appeals reversed the chancery court's ruling, holding that the OJI Appeals Panel does not qualify as a civil service board and its decisions regarding OJI benefits do not affect 'employment status' as interpreted under the relevant statute. Therefore, judicial review should be conducted via a common law writ of certiorari, and the OJI Appeals Panel's original denial of benefits was reinstated.

On-the-Job InjuryAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewStatutory InterpretationCivil Service BoardUniform Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA)Common Law CertiorariMunicipal EmployeesFirefightersPolice Officers
References
81
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Edwards v. City of Memphis

The case involves police officers (Appellants) suing the City of Memphis and its Director of Police Services (Appellees) for violating Memphis City Charter Section 67. The officers claimed they were entitled to automatic promotion to Captain after thirty years of service, a rank that the City subsequently abolished. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the City, finding that Section 67 is a retirement tool, not a guarantee of employment. The appellate court affirmed this decision, holding that the officers have no legal right to work as Captains, that the rank no longer exists, and that Section 67 only provides for enhanced pension benefits upon retirement, not continued employment in that rank. The court also found the City's decision to abolish the rank was not discriminatory.

Police PromotionCity Charter Section 67Public Employee RightsRank AbolitionPension EnhancementEmployment GuaranteeSummary Judgment AppealMandamus PetitionRes Judicata DefenseMemphis City Government
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bridges v. City of Memphis

Tern Bridges, individually and as the surviving spouse of Private William Bridges, appealed the trial court's dismissal of her wrongful death claim against the City of Memphis and its Fire Department. Private William Bridges, a firefighter, died in the line of duty due to alleged negligence and procedural violations by his supervisor and other Fire Department employees. The trial court's dismissal was presumably based on governmental immunity theories. The appellate court examined the applicability of the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), distinguishing between discretionary and operational functions, and found that the plaintiff's allegations of negligence based on violations of the Fire Department's Operations Manual constituted non-discretionary (operational) acts, thus surviving a motion to dismiss. The court also addressed and rejected the defendants' arguments regarding the public duty doctrine and the policemen and firemen's rule, concluding they did not preclude the lawsuit against the municipal entities. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order of dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Wrongful Death ClaimGovernmental ImmunityTennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA)Discretionary Function ExceptionPlanning-Operational TestPublic Duty DoctrinePolicemen and Firemen's RuleFire Department NegligenceProcedural ViolationsLine of Duty Death
References
14
Case No. C.A. No. 02A01-9803-CV-00069 Shelby Circuit No. 76743-7 T.D.
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 22, 1998

Roger Brown v. City of Memphis

Roger Brown, a City of Memphis employee, suffered a severe on-the-job leg injury on May 12, 1995, while operating a bulldozer at a sewage treatment plant. He was attempting to free a jammed cable in raw sewage when another employee's action caused the cable to jerk, lacerating his leg and leading to severe complications. The City, not covered by the Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Act, had an 'on the job injury' (OJI) program, through which Brown received over $150,000 for lost wages and medical bills. Brown sued the City under the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), alleging negligence, but the trial court granted summary judgment to the City, dismissing the action because the OJI payments exceeded the GTLA's $130,000 damage limit. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that the OJI payments, being a fringe benefit akin to an insurance plan, should be considered advance payments against any tort liability under the GTLA, rather than outright compensation precluding further action, and therefore, the City should be given credit for the payments but not summary judgment.

Governmental Tort LiabilitySovereign ImmunitySummary Judgment AppealOn-the-job Injury ProgramWorkers' Compensation ExemptionMunicipal NegligenceDamages CapAdvance Payments CreditAppellate Court DecisionTort Law
References
16
Case No. W2012-00274-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 05, 2013

Gwendolyn Jeffrey v. City of Memphis

Gwendolyn Jeffrey, widow of firefighter Wendell Jeffrey, sought "Heart, Hypertension, and Lung" (HHL) benefits from the City of Memphis after her husband's death from cardiac arrhythmia. The City denied her claim, leading to an appeal before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ found that the City had successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of causation between Jeffrey's employment and his cardiac condition, and Mrs. Jeffrey failed to prove causation by a preponderance of the evidence. The chancery court affirmed the ALJ's decision, acknowledging that it might have ruled differently but found no unlawful procedure, arbitrary conduct, or insubstantial evidence. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the chancery court's decision, agreeing that the City provided competent medical proof to rebut the presumption and that Mrs. Jeffrey did not prove a substantial causal connection.

Firefighter BenefitsCardiac ConditionStatutory PresumptionCausationAdministrative Law Judge (ALJ)Chancery Court AppealAppellate ReviewHHL ProgramMedical EvidencePreponderance of Evidence
References
6
Case No. W2018-01353-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 31, 2020

Pamela Pryor v. City of Memphis

This case involves Pamela Pryor's appeal against the City of Memphis' denial of On-the-Job-Injury (OJI) benefits after her firefighter husband's death. The City denied the claim due to the absence of an autopsy report, a requirement of its OJI policy. The trial court reversed an Administrative Law Judge's decision, finding the City's policy conflicted with Tennessee Code Annotated section 7-51-201, which establishes a statutory presumption for firefighters' deaths caused by hypertension or heart disease occurring in the line of duty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, deeming the City's autopsy requirement null and void for creating an additional burden on the claimant and usurping the statutory presumption. The case has been remanded to the ALJ for a new hearing applying the statutory burden-shifting analysis without the invalidated policy.

OJI benefitsFirefighter presumptionStatutory conflictAutopsy requirementBurden of proofAdministrative Law JudgeChancery CourtAppellate reviewRemedial statutesHypertension
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pelham Council of Governing Boards v. City of Mount Vernon

This case addresses a special proceeding initiated by the Pelham Council of Governing Boards, an unincorporated entity comprising the Villages of Pelham and Pelham Manor, the Town of Pelham, and the Pelham Union Free School District. The petitioner sought to annul a resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Mount Vernon in January 2000, which rezoned a 14.55-acre site for the Sanford Boulevard Redevelopment Project. The core issue was the petitioner's standing to bring the action. The court examined associational standing, noting that while three of the four member municipalities might have individual standing under the Westchester County Administrative Code, the Pelham Union Free School District would not. Ultimately, the court determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate proper representation of its members' views or a necessity for organizational standing in this context, granting the respondents' defense and dismissing the petition for lack of standing.

Organizational StandingAssociational StandingLand UseZoningMunicipal LawCapacity to SueEnvironmental Review (SEQRA)Mount Vernon City CouncilPelham MunicipalitiesSchool District Standing
References
18
Case No. W2009-01520-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2010

Jacqueline Redmon v. City of Memphis

Jacqueline Redmon, a benefits specialist for the City of Memphis, was terminated after she used a city database to obtain a police officer's phone number to inquire about her husband's arrest. Both the City's Civil Service Commission and the Chancery Court upheld her termination. Redmon appealed, citing violations of constitutional provisions, unlawful procedure, arbitrary decision-making, and insufficient evidence. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the termination, finding that the Commission's decision was supported by substantial and material evidence, that the City's policies were not unconstitutionally vague, and that Redmon's due process rights were not violated by the hearing procedures or changes in the stated policy violations.

Employee TerminationPublic Employee MisconductConfidentiality ViolationDatabase Access MisuseDue Process RightsCivil Service AppealJudicial Review of Administrative DecisionsEmployment LawAppellate Court DecisionPolicy Violations
References
12
Case No. W2023-00519-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 01, 2024

Kerry Clay v. City of Memphis Sanitation Division

Kerry Clay, a home improvement contractor, sustained a head injury when a discarded door, which he had placed for collection, was loaded into a City of Memphis garbage truck compactor and struck him. Clay sued the City under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), alleging negligence by City employees. The trial court found the City liable, awarding damages that were subsequently reduced to the statutory cap of $300,000. On appeal, the City challenged various factual findings, including fault allocation, proof of negligence, employee identification, and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the evidence did not preponderate against the initial findings.

Governmental Tort Liability ActNegligenceComparative FaultPersonal InjuryHead InjuryDamages CapScope of EmploymentPreponderance of EvidenceAppellate ReviewMedical Evidence Admissibility
References
21
Showing 1-10 of 4,976 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