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
Sep 07, 2017

Sophie G. ex rel. Kelly G. v. Wilson County Schools

Sophie G., a seven-year-old girl with autism, was denied enrollment in Wilson County Schools' after-school program, Kids Club, because she was not fully toilet trained. Her mother, Kelly G., filed a complaint alleging disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court, presided over by Chief Judge Crenshaw, granted Wilson County Schools' motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The court also denied the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, finding they had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable injury. The decision emphasizes the requirement to exhaust administrative remedies for claims that seek relief available under the IDEA.

Disability RightsRehabilitation Act Section 504Americans with Disabilities Act Title IIIndividuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)Exhaustion of Administrative RemediesPreliminary InjunctionSpecial Education ServicesFree Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)Autism Spectrum DisorderToilet Training Accommodation
References
50
Case No. M2017-02492-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2018

LaSonya Robertson v. Clarksville-Montgomery County School System

This slip-and-fall case involves LaSonya Robertson, a middle school teacher, who sued the Clarksville-Montgomery County School System after falling on a wet floor. She alleged negligence by custodians who inadequately placed wet-floor signs. The trial court initially found the school district 75% negligent and Ms. Robertson 25% at fault, awarding her $180,000. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the finding of the school district's negligence and denial of immunity under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act. However, the appellate court reversed the allocation of comparative fault to Ms. Robertson, determining the school district was 100% at fault, and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Slip-and-fallPremises liabilityGovernmental tort liabilityComparative faultNegligenceWet floorSchool districtTeacher injuryAppellate reviewOperational decision
References
17
Case No. M2018-01878-SC-R11-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2021

Melanie Lemon v. Williamson County Schools

Melanie Lemon, a tenured teacher, resigned her position and filed a wrongful termination claim against Williamson County Schools and individual school officials, alleging constructive discharge under the Teacher Tenure Act. The Supreme Court of Tennessee considered whether the doctrine of constructive discharge is applicable to wrongful termination claims under the Act. The Court determined that constructive discharge is inconsistent with the Act's comprehensive procedural framework designed for teacher dismissals. Consequently, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals' decision to apply the doctrine and affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Lemon's wrongful termination claims. Additionally, the Court affirmed the lower courts' dismissal of Lemon's tort claims, including negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, against both the school system and the individual officials, citing governmental immunity and the conduct not meeting the high legal standard for outrageousness.

Teacher Tenure ActConstructive DischargeWrongful TerminationGovernmental ImmunityIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressNegligenceSchool OfficialsEmployment LawAdministrative RemediesJudicial Review
References
33
Case No. Nos. 01-04-01277-CV to 01-04-01287-CV; 01-04-01326-CV to 01-04-01333-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 26, 2006

Jim Wells County v. EL PASO PRODUCTION OIL

This case involves multiple Texas counties and school districts (Taxing Units) alleging fraud and conspiracy against numerous oil and gas companies (Oil Companies). The Taxing Units claimed the Oil Companies undervalued oil and gas reserves for ad valorem tax purposes through various manipulative schemes, leading to underpayment of taxes. The trial court dismissed the lawsuits due to lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, asserting that the Taxing Units failed to exhaust administrative remedies available under the Texas Tax Code. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, holding that the Tax Code provides a comprehensive and exclusive regulatory scheme for addressing property appraisal disputes, including those involving alleged fraud, through the Appraisal Review Board, thereby divesting district courts of original jurisdiction.

Property TaxAd Valorem TaxOil & GasFraudConspiracyUndervaluationExclusive JurisdictionAdministrative RemediesAppraisal Review BoardTax Code
References
17
Case No. M2022-01719-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 18, 2024

Parents' Choice Tennessee v. Jason Golden, in his Official Capacity as Superintendent of Williamson County Schools

This appeal arose from a lawsuit brought by parents and an education-focused parents’ rights organization against the Williamson County Board of Education. They challenged the Board's Wit & Wisdom curriculum, asserting it violated Tennessee laws restricting Common Core instructional materials and prohibiting certain concepts in public schools. The trial court dismissed the suit, citing the plaintiffs' lack of standing and failure to exhaust administrative remedies for one claim. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of claims by a family who had left the school system and upheld the dismissal of the prohibited concepts claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. However, the appellate court reversed the trial court's finding of lack of standing for other plaintiff families and the parents' rights organization, and it also reversed the dismissal of the Common Core claim, remanding that part of the case for further proceedings.

Education LawSchool CurriculumCommon Core StandardsProhibited ConceptsStanding LawAdministrative Remedies ExhaustionJudicial ReviewDeclaratory ReliefInjunctive ReliefTennessee Court of Appeals
References
60
Case No. 2013-DCL-3455-D
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 01, 2014

Victor Quijano, Doing Business as Target Pest Control v. Cameron County, City of Brownsville & Brownsville Independent School District

Plaintiffs, Cameron County, City of Brownsville, and Brownsville Independent School District, initiated a lawsuit against Victor Quijano, operating as Target Pest Control, for the recovery of delinquent ad valorem taxes. The taxes were related to tangible personal property for the tax years spanning 2005 through 2009. Quijano asserted that his business ceased operations in 2008 or 2009, and he did not possess significant taxable property, largely functioning as a subcontractor. The 103rd Judicial District Court of Cameron County, presided over by Hon. Janeth Leal, issued a judgment on December 1, 2014. The court granted the plaintiffs' demand for delinquent taxes, along with penalties, interest, and attorney fees, totaling $1,726.79, and mandated additional accruals post-judgment. All other requested relief was denied, rendering the judgment conclusive and subject to appeal.

Tax DelinquencyAd Valorem TaxesPersonal Property TaxSummary JudgmentTexas Tax CodeProperty Tax EnforcementBusiness TaxationSubcontractor LiabilityCivil Procedure RulesAppellate Court Brief
References
4
Case No. 06-22-00022-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 16, 2022

Cynthia Martin v. Hopkins County, Hopkins County Judge Robert Newsom, Hopkins County Commissioner Mickey Barker, Hopkins County Commissioner Greg Anglin, Hopkins County Commissioner Wade Bartley, and Hopkins County Commissioner Joe Price

Cynthia Martin raised ultra vires claims against Hopkins County officials regarding an agreement with a private company to build a solar power plant. Martin contended the agreement was a tax abatement under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 381, Section 381.004(g), which she argued did not comply with the Texas Tax Code provisions. The County and officials asserted the agreement was a grant of public money under Section 381.004(h), thus not governed by the Texas Tax Code. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the County. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the agreement was for a grant of public funds, not a tax abatement, because the developer was obligated to pay all ad valorem taxes, and the payments from the county were program grants calculated with reference to those paid taxes, not a reduction or nullification of the tax liability itself.

Ultra Vires ClaimsEconomic Development AgreementTax AbatementPublic Funds GrantTexas Local Government Code Chapter 381Texas Tax Code Chapter 312Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewContract ConstructionStatutory Construction
References
39
Case No. 13-14-00293-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 26, 2015

San Patricio County, Texas v. Nueces County, Texas and Nueces County Appraisal District

This is a reply brief filed by San Patricio County, Texas, in an appeal against Nueces County and Nueces County Appraisal District. The core issue revolves around unresolved boundary disputes between the two counties, leading to double taxation for industrial taxpayers like Occidental Petroleum Company. San Patricio County argues that the Nueces County District Court lacked jurisdiction and venue, and erred in granting summary judgment without determining the boundary line. They assert that the 2003 Judgment, which declared 'natural and artificial modifications to the shoreline of San Patricio County shall form a part of San Patricio County,' includes docks, piers, and similar facilities as part of their county, consistent with maritime law and riparian rights. The county seeks reversal of the trial court's decision, either for transfer back to a neutral Refugio County District Court, or for a judgment declaring the disputed properties within San Patricio County's jurisdiction, or for a remand to resolve factual issues concerning the boundary.

County Boundary DisputeJurisdictionVenueSummary JudgmentCollateral Attack2003 Judgment InterpretationShoreline ModificationsDocks and PiersRiparian RightsTaxation Dispute
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Adkins v. Ector County Independent School District

This case involves Frances M. Adkins appealing a judgment dismissing her suit for want of jurisdiction against the Ector County Independent School District (ECISD) and the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission. Adkins sought judicial review of an appeals panel decision concerning supplemental income benefits. The trial court dismissed the suit, agreeing with ECISD that Adkins' petition was not timely filed with the Commission within the statutory forty-day period, as the Commission received it after the deadline. Adkins argued that the "mail box rule" under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure should apply. The appellate court reversed and remanded, ruling that the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, including the mail box rule, apply to judicial review of workers' compensation cases when they do not conflict with the Texas Labor Code. The court found that Adkins' petition was timely filed under the mail box rule, thus restoring jurisdiction to the trial court.

Workers' CompensationJurisdictionMail Box RuleTimely FilingStatutory InterpretationTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureAppellate ReviewLabor CodeSupplemental Income BenefitsEctor County
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ector County Independent School District v. Adkins

This case addresses the applicability of the mailbox rule, as outlined in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 5, to filings made with the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission under Texas Labor Code section 410.253. The court affirmed the court of appeals' decision that the mailbox rule indeed applies to such filings. Consequently, the petition for review filed by Ector County Independent School District was denied. However, the court explicitly disapproved of the lower court's assertion that timely filing under section 410.253 is a jurisdictional requirement, referencing the precedent set in Albertson’s Inc. v. Sinclair.

Mailbox RuleTexas Rule of Civil Procedure 5Texas Labor Code § 410.253Workers' Compensation CommissionJurisdictionTimely FilingPetition for ReviewAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationCase Law Affirmation
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 8,241 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