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

Fernandez v. Kiesling

Appellant, Mrs. Shirley Fernandez, joined by her husband, filed a lawsuit against Appellee, Mrs. Vivian F. Kiesling, for personal injuries resulting from a car accident. Mrs. Fernandez was a passenger in Mrs. Kiesling's car, which collided with a parked vehicle. The jury found Mrs. Kiesling negligent but also determined that Mrs. Fernandez was a 'guest' under the Texas Guest Statute, leading to a take-nothing judgment. Mrs. Fernandez appealed, arguing she was a passenger for hire, that the jury instruction regarding 'payment or agreement to pay a share of operating expenses' was a comment on the evidence, and that the instruction requiring payment to be 'the motivating cause' instead of 'a motivating cause' was erroneous. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the precedent that a tangible benefit must be 'the motivating influence' for furnishing transportation to remove a passenger from the Guest Statute's provisions.

Guest StatutePassenger for HireMotivating InfluenceCar PoolPersonal InjuryAutomobile AccidentNegligenceJury InstructionAppellate ReviewTexas Law
References
20
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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tribune Co. v. Purcigliotti

The Tribune Company, plaintiff, filed a RICO action against multiple defendants including Robert A. Purcigliotti, Cascione, Chechanover & Purcigliotti (CCP), Dr. Walter Stingle, three unions, and 585 individual union members. Tribune alleges violations of the RICO Act, common law fraud, and unjust enrichment stemming from a scheme to file fraudulent workers’ compensation claims for hearing loss against the New York News, motivated by a past strike. Defendants moved to dismiss the claims on various grounds, including abstention, failure to plead with particularity under Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b), immunity, failure to state a claim under RICO (pattern, operation/management, causation), failure to state state-law fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims, unjust enrichment, and collateral estoppel/res judicata. The court denied most of the defendants' motions to dismiss, finding the plaintiff adequately pleaded its claims and that abstention and immunity were not applicable in most instances. However, the court granted the motions to dismiss the unjust enrichment claims against the Union and Individual defendants, finding insufficient allegations of enrichment.

RICO ActWorkers' Compensation FraudMail FraudAbstention DoctrinePleading RequirementsWitness ImmunityRacketeering EnterpriseConspiracyUnjust EnrichmentCollateral Estoppel
References
93
Case No. NO. 12-01-00089-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 20, 2002

Bryant Moore v. State of Texas

Bryant Moore appealed his seven-year sentence for aggravated assault following a guilty plea. His appeal raised two issues: alleged racially-motivated remarks by the jury foreman and the jury's consideration of parole law during deliberations. Appellant filed a motion for new trial, supported by an affidavit from juror Ginger Elrod. The trial court struck Elrod's affidavit based on Texas Rule of Evidence 606(b) and overruled the motion. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the alleged jury misconduct did not constitute "outside influences" as defined by legal precedent, but rather originated from within the jury, thereby upholding the exclusion of the juror's testimony.

Aggravated AssaultJury MisconductMotion for New TrialOutside InfluenceJuror TestimonyRule of Evidence 606(b)Appellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionCriminal AppealSentencing Appeal
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 2009

Augustin v. Enlarged City School Dist. of Newburgh

Plaintiff Ertha Augustin, a teacher of Haitian descent, sued Annette Saturnelli, Joan Goudy-Crosson, and the Enlarged City School District of Newburgh under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York State Executive Law § 296, alleging employment termination due to national origin discrimination. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment for Saturnelli and the School District on all claims, and for Goudy-Crosson on state law claims, finding no evidence of discriminatory animus or knowledge on their part. However, summary judgment was denied for Goudy-Crosson on the federal discrimination claim, as sufficient evidence of potential discriminatory motive and influence on plaintiff's termination existed to warrant a jury trial.

DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationEmployment TerminationTeacherSchool DistrictSummary JudgmentSection 1983New York State Executive LawQualified ImmunityMcDonnell Douglas Framework
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Bradley

This case concerns the appeal of a defendant, Bradley, convicted of first-degree manslaughter, who claimed self-defense against her estranged boyfriend, Joseph Wilburn. She argued that her actions were influenced by post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and battered woman syndrome (BWS), stemming from a history of abuse. The prosecution introduced evidence of a prior uncharged incident where the defendant had stabbed an unidentified man in the thigh. The Court of Appeals reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial, holding that the admission of the prior stabbing incident was an error. The Court found this "Molineux" evidence lacked sufficient probative value to disprove the defendant's specific state of mind regarding justification, and its prejudicial effect, suggesting a propensity for violence, outweighed its relevance. The lack of context for the prior stabbing made it unreliable for inferring motivation in the current case.

ManslaughterSelf-defenseBattered Woman SyndromePTSDMolineux EvidencePrior Bad ActsPropensity EvidencePrejudicial ErrorReversalNew Trial
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Shepherd v. Goodwill Industries of South Texas, Inc.

Plaintiff Sheree Shepherd, a Black and legally blind individual, sued Defendant Goodwill Industries of South Texas Inc. for alleged discrimination based on race and disability, and for retaliation. The claims stemmed from Goodwill's decision not to hire Shepherd for a Junior Editor position, following her prior EEOC charge against former supervisors at South Texas Lighthouse for the Blind (STLB). Goodwill argued legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for not hiring her, including a slow skills assessment and potential security clearance issues at the military base where the job was located. The Court denied Goodwill's motion for summary judgment, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Goodwill's reasons were a pretext for discrimination and whether a former supervisor, Ms. Johnson, influenced the hiring decision with retaliatory motives under the 'cat's paw' theory.

DiscriminationRetaliationTitle VIIAmericans with Disabilities ActADAEmployment LawSummary JudgmentRace DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationHiring Discrimination
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 25, 2015

Trane v. Northrop Grumman Corp.

Plaintiff John Trane initiated a lawsuit against Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, alleging discrimination based on national origin and disability, alongside retaliation for protected complaints, under federal and New York state laws. Trane claimed he received negative evaluations, was transferred to an unmanageable program, and was ultimately terminated due to animus stemming from his Iranian national origin and disability, as well as in retaliation for his discrimination complaints. Defendant sought summary judgment, presenting non-discriminatory reasons for its employment actions. The court, presided over by District Judge William F. Kuntz, II, determined that Plaintiff failed to adequately demonstrate that the Defendant's stated reasons were pretextual or that discriminatory motives substantially influenced the employment decisions. Consequently, the Defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted, leading to the dismissal of all federal and state law claims.

DiscriminationRetaliationNational Origin DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationSummary JudgmentTitle VIIAmericans with Disabilities ActNew York State Executive LawEmployment LawPretext
References
48
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
Showing 1-10 of 535 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