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. 02-20-00070-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 26, 2021

John Nguyen and Jeslyn Tran v. Minh Nguyen and Nga Le

Appellants John Nguyen and Jeslyn Tran (Managers) appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of appellees Minh Nguyen and Nga Le (Co-owners). The dispute originated from alleged unpaid profit distributions from SJN Hollywood Nails & Spa LLC, a business jointly owned and managed by the parties. Managers claimed the dispute was resolved by a settlement agreement, but Co-owners argued the agreement's conditions for release were not met. The trial court's decision was largely based on deemed admissions due to Managers' repeated discovery misconduct, despite Managers' claims of non-receipt and illness. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no abuse of discretion in deeming the admissions given the Managers' pattern of discovery abuse and that the settlement's release provision was conditional and not fully satisfied. The court also upheld the award of attorney's fees.

Summary JudgmentDeemed AdmissionsDiscovery SanctionsContract DisputeBreach of Fiduciary DutySettlement AgreementAttorney's FeesCivil ProcedureAppellate ReviewBusiness Organizations Code
References
26
Case No. 04-08-00443-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 04, 2009

Daniel M. Van Dam and Cheryl L. Van Dam v. Patrick L. Lewis and Dorisa L. Lewis

This appeal concerns a property dispute over an alleged easement providing water access to Lake Corpus Christi for residents of the Pernitas Point Subdivision. Appellees Patrick L. Lewis and Dorisa L. Lewis claimed an easement by implied dedication across land owned by Appellants Daniel M. Van Dam and Cheryl L. Van Dam. The trial court granted a declaratory judgment in favor of the Lewises, confirming an easement for the benefit of the public and subdivision lot owners. However, the appellate court found that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish donative intent by the original landowners to dedicate the property for public use. The court concluded that mere acquiescence to use by neighbors, without additional factors implying donative intent, was not sufficient to prove an implied dedication. Therefore, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and rendered judgment that the property is not subject to an easement by implied dedication.

Property LawEasement by Implied DedicationAppellate ReviewDeclaratory JudgmentReal Estate DisputeDonative IntentPublic UseLand SubdivisionTexas LawLake Access
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Van Dam v. Lewis

This appeal concerns a property dispute over an alleged easement providing water access to Lake Corpus Christi for residents of Pernitas Point Subdivision. Appellees Patrick L. Lewis and Dorissa Lewis claimed an easement by implied dedication existed across a portion of land owned by Appellants Daniel Van Dam and Cheryl L. Van Dam. The trial court initially granted a declaratory judgment in favor of the Lewises, confirming the easement. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, finding the evidence legally insufficient to establish an easement by implied dedication. Specifically, the court determined there was insufficient proof of donative intent by the original landowners to dedicate the property for public use, noting that mere acquiescence or limited "owner access" was not enough to meet the heavy burden required.

Easement by Implied DedicationProperty RightsDonative IntentPublic AccessLake Corpus ChristiPernitas Point SubdivisionDeclaratory JudgmentAppellate ReviewLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceTexas Property Law
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc.

The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) filed suit against Atlas Van Lines, Inc. for violating regulations related to owner-operator payments and escrow funds, stemming from issues with its agent, Thomas Van & Storage, Inc., which subsequently declared bankruptcy. Atlas conceded liability for past regulatory breaches but argued against a general injunction, contending that the issues with the bankrupt agent were moot and that it had implemented a new compliance program. The Court, however, found that Atlas had a history of consistent non-compliance, indicating a significant risk of future violations. Consequently, the Court granted the ICC's motion for summary judgment and issued a permanent injunction against Atlas to prevent further violations of ICC regulations.

Interstate Commerce CommissionAtlas Van LinesSummary JudgmentPermanent InjunctionMotor CarrierOwner-OperatorLeasing RegulationsEscrow FundsRegulatory ComplianceBankruptcy
References
27
Case No. 01-12-01162-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 21, 2014

Sheren Nguyen v. Lijun Zhang

Sheren Nguyen appealed a trial court's judgment awarding her $300 for past medical expenses in her negligence suit against Lijun Zhang. Nguyen argued the damages were factually insufficient and that the trial court improperly allowed violations of her motion in limine. The First District of Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision. The appellate court found Nguyen did not preserve error regarding the motion in limine and concluded that the jury's $300 award was factually sufficient, noting the jury could reasonably attribute some of Nguyen's claimed injuries to other factors, including a subsequent car accident.

NegligenceAutomobile CollisionDamagesMedical ExpensesFactual SufficiencyMotion in LimineAppellate ReviewCausationJury VerdictTrial Court Judgment
References
29
Case No. 14-16-00686-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 14, 2018

Scott Van Dyke v. Builders West, Inc.

Scott Van Dyke appealed a final judgment favoring Builders West, Inc. Builders West had sued Van Dyke for breach of contract due to nonpayment on a home renovation, while Van Dyke counter-sued for overcharging and faulty work. A jury found for Builders West, awarding significant damages and attorney's fees. Van Dyke's appeal challenged the sufficiency of evidence regarding good and workmanlike performance, the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on supervision, and the attorney's fee rate. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, finding that the jury charge did not require proof of good and workmanlike performance, Van Dyke waived his second issue, and Chapter 38 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code does not limit attorney's fees to amounts actually incurred when found reasonable and necessary.

breach of contracthome renovationattorney feesappellate reviewsufficiency of evidencejury chargeimplied warrantyquantum meruitsubstantial performanceTexas Civil Practice and Remedies Code
References
30
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 01314 [180 AD3d 969]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 26, 2020

Alexandridis v. Van Gogh Contr. Co.

Theodoros Alexandridis, an injured plaintiff, brought an action against Van Gogh Contracting Company, Van Gogh Painting Corp., Van Gogh Construction Corp. (collectively Van Gogh defendants), and Christopher Meskouris and Filantey Meskouris (collectively Meskouris defendants) after sustaining injuries from a ladder fall at the Meskouris defendants' home. The plaintiff alleged violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6), and common-law negligence. The Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the Supreme Court's order, denying the Van Gogh defendants' motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims due to triable issues of fact regarding their contractor status and control over the worksite. The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment for the Meskouris defendants on Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence, citing their failure to demonstrate a lack of constructive notice of a dangerous condition. It also affirmed the Meskouris defendants' summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) based on the homeowner's exemption.

Personal injuryLadder accidentConstructionHomeowner's exemptionLabor Law § 200Labor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 241(6)Common-law negligenceSummary judgmentTriable issues of fact
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Humana Health Plan, Inc. v. Nguyen

Humana Health Plan, Inc. initiated this action against Patrick Nguyen, David Abney, and Crady, Jewett & McCulley, LLP, under ERISA, seeking to enforce plan terms and obtain equitable relief. Abney and Crady were later dismissed, leaving Nguyen as the sole defendant. The central dispute revolved around Humana's claim for reimbursement of $274,607.84 in medical expenses paid by the Plan for Nguyen, following his receipt of a $255,000 third-party settlement from an automobile accident. The court granted Humana's motion for summary judgment, denying Nguyen's cross-motion, concluding that Humana functioned as a Plan fiduciary with standing and that the Plan's terms unambiguously established an equitable lien on the settlement funds in Humana's favor.

ERISASummary JudgmentFiduciary DutyReimbursementSubrogationEquitable LienPlan AdministratorPlan ManagerSettlement FundsAutomobile Accident
References
23
Case No. ADJ1597303 (ANA 0386686)
Regular
Jul 31, 2013

NHAN NGUYEN vs. DMJ SPA AND NAILS, INC., dba DMJ TRUCKING, DANNY CAO DOAN, MY HOANG THI TRINH, NGHIA CONG TRINH

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case involves Nhan Nguyen as the applicant and DMJ Spa and Nails, Inc. and its principals as defendants. The applicant filed a petition for reconsideration of a decision dated April 30, 2013. However, the petitioner has since withdrawn their petition. Therefore, the Board has issued an order dismissing the petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalWithdrawn PetitionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardApplicantDefendantDMJ Spa and NailsInc.Danny Cao DoanMy Hoang Thi Trinh
References
0
Case No. 09-13-00505-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 31, 2015

Jefferson County, Texas v. Ha Penny Nguyen

This appellate case concerns an employment dispute between Jefferson County and its former employee, Ha Penny Nguyen. Nguyen sued the County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging adverse employment actions, retaliation for protected speech, and denial of due process rights during her employment as a clerk in Precinct 8 and Precinct 1. The jury found in Nguyen's favor, but the appellate court affirmed only the First Amendment retaliation claim related to her employment in Precinct 8, along with corresponding lost earnings and benefits. The court reversed claims related to Precinct 1 as time-barred and also reversed the award for mental anguish damages, remanding the case for recalculation of prejudgment interest.

Employment disputeRetaliationFirst AmendmentFree speechDue processPublic employeeConstructive dischargeStatute of limitationsMental anguish damagesAttorney's fees
References
125
Showing 1-10 of 297 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