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. 06-08-00024-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2008

Charles Terrell McClure v. State

Charles Terrell McClure appealed his sentence for constructive delivery of methamphetamine, challenging the admission of extraneous offense evidence during the punishment phase. He argued insufficient evidence corroborated his extrajudicial confession and that the evidence's probative value was substantially outweighed by its potential for prejudice. The Court of Appeals, Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana, affirmed the trial court's judgment. The court held that extrajudicial confessions of extraneous offenses do not require corroboration in the punishment phase and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the evidence, especially considering McClure had filed an application for community supervision.

Criminal LawExtraneous OffensesPunishment PhaseAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionCorroboration of ConfessionExtrajudicial AdmissionProbative ValueUnfair PrejudiceSentencing
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 02, 2012

Next Phase Distribution, Inc. v. John Does 1-27

Plaintiff Next Phase Distribution, Inc. filed a motion seeking leave for early discovery to identify John Doe defendants who allegedly infringed copyright by downloading their pornographic film via BitTorrent. The Court initially ordered Next Phase to show cause why John Does 2-27 should not be severed. After reviewing Next Phase's response and considering a district-wide split in similar cases, the Court sua sponte exercised its discretion to sever and dismiss without prejudice all claims against John Does 2-27 due to potential for differing defenses, risk of false positives, and the sensitive nature of the subject matter. The Court then granted Next Phase’s Motion for Discovery solely for John Doe 1 and issued a protective order to maintain confidentiality, citing the need for information to identify John Doe 1 and the routine deletion of ISP logs.

Copyright InfringementBitTorrentPeer-to-peer networkJohn Doe defendantsExpedited discoverySeverance of claimsFederal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 20(a)Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 20(b)Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 21Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 42(b)
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mason Tenders District Council of Greater New York v. Phase Construction Services, Inc.

This opinion and order addresses motions brought by the Mason Tenders District Council of Greater New York, various associated Funds, and John Virga (Plaintiffs) against Phase Construction Services, Inc. and SL Construction Group, Inc. (Defendants). Plaintiffs alleged breach of contract and violations of the Taft-Hartley Act and ERISA. The Court granted Plaintiffs' motion to amend the complaint to include Salvatore LaBarca and Phase NY as defendants, finding good cause despite delays due to ongoing discovery issues and diligence in seeking amendment upon discovering new facts regarding LaBarca's corporate conduct and the creation of Phase NY. The Court also granted Plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery, citing Defendants' continued non-compliance and awarding attorneys' fees.

Breach of ContractERISA ViolationsTaft-Hartley ActMotion to Amend ComplaintMotion to Compel DiscoveryCorporate Veil PiercingAlter Ego LiabilitySingle Employer DoctrineDiscovery DisputesCourt Sanctions
References
52
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United Technologies Communications Co. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union No. 3

This case involves a damage action brought by United Technologies Communication Company (UTCC), formerly General Dynamics Communications Company (GDCC), against Local 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), under Section 303 of the National Labor Relations Act. UTCC alleged that Local 3 engaged in illegal secondary boycotts and jurisdictional disputes at two New York City sites, One Broadway and Two Broadway, in violation of Section 8(b)(4) of the Act. The court found Local 3 liable, concluding that its members, agents, and executive board supported and ratified unlawful actions, including work stoppages, threats, vandalism, and harassment, aimed at forcing employers to cease business with GDCC and assign work to Local 3 members. While liability was established, the plaintiff's claim for lost sales to potential customers was denied due to insufficient proof of direct causation. The decision concludes the liability phase of the trial, with a second phase to be scheduled for the determination of damages.

Labor Law ViolationSecondary BoycottJurisdictional DisputeNational Labor Relations ActTaft-Hartley ActUnion LiabilityAgency PrinciplesCollateral EstoppelDamage ActionNon-Jury Trial
References
45
Case No. 14-02-00289-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 13, 2003

Burton, Kevin v. State

This is an appeal from a revocation of probation where Kevin Burton challenged the trial court's decision. Burton was on probation for possession of a controlled substance and faced revocation for failing to comply with terms, including paying fines and performing community service. The appellant argued insufficient evidence for the violations and improper admission of extraneous offense evidence. The appellate court reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence and the trial court's discretion in admitting evidence during the punishment phase. The court concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support the probation violations and that the extraneous offense evidence was relevant for assessing punishment.

Probation RevocationSufficiency of EvidenceCommunity Service ViolationFailure to Pay FinesExtraneous OffensesAdmissibility of EvidencePunishment HearingAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionControlled Substance Possession
References
15
Case No. 09-06-126 CR
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2007

James Jones, A/K/A Squire James Jones, Jr. AKA Derrick Joseph Jones A/K/A Derrick Joseph v. State

James Jones was convicted of the murder of Graffit Jones Winford and sentenced to fifty years of confinement. On appeal, Jones argued the trial court erred by restricting his counsel's cross-examination of a State's witness during the punishment phase and by permitting the Court's bailiff to testify. The Court of Appeals found no abuse of discretion in limiting cross-examination, stating the proferred questions were either cumulative or irrelevant to punishment. Additionally, the court concluded that Jones suffered no prejudice or harm from the bailiff's brief testimony, given his minimal contact with the jury and the overall evidence. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Criminal LawAppellate ProcedureEvidentiary RulingsConfrontation ClauseWitness ImpeachmentJudicial DiscretionBailiff RoleJury ImpactSchizoaffective DisorderMitigating Evidence
References
15
Case No. ADJ7690958
Regular
Jul 17, 2012

MICHEL SALMO vs. PHASE II TRANSPORTATION, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an administrative law judge's decision. The judge found the applicant, Michel Salmo, to be an independent contractor, not an employee of Phase II Transportation, at the time of his alleged injury. This finding was based on the judge's assessment of Salmo's testimony as unreliable and contradictory regarding his truck ownership and lease arrangements. The Board adopted the judge's report and recommendations, emphasizing the great weight given to credibility findings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.independent contractoremployeeemployment relationshiplease agreementowner-operatorcontrol
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hemmings v. St. Marks Housing Associates, Phase II L.P.

The case involves an appeal concerning a plaintiff who was injured on a demolition site in January 1991, allegedly struck by a falling beam. The plaintiff sued the property owner, St. Marks Housing Assoc., Phase II L.P., and general contractor, Blakel Construction Corp., alleging negligence and Labor Law violations. The Supreme Court initially granted the plaintiff summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). However, the appellate court reversed this, ruling that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently establish the manner of the accident due to a lack of corroborating evidence beyond his deposition testimony. The appeal from Blakel regarding a caption amendment and a cross-appeal from L.C. Drywall Corp. were dismissed on procedural grounds, with the order being modified and affirmed as modified.

Personal InjuryLabor Law § 240(1)Summary Judgment ReversalConstruction AccidentFalling ObjectIndemnification ClaimsProcedural DismissalSufficiency of EvidenceAppellate PracticeWitness Hearsay
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 21, 2016

Davis v. International Bank of Commerce (In re Diamond Beach VP, LP)

This case is an appeal from a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judgment concerning the valuation of an unfinished condominium complex, Diamond Beach, in Galveston, Texas. Appellant Randall Davis, the principal owner and guarantor of the debt, disputes the valuation, arguing it was too low, thus increasing his deficiency judgment owed to Appellee International Bank of Commerce (IBC). The project, consisting of Phase I (completed units and common amenities) and Phase II (undeveloped land with a right to use Phase I amenities), went bankrupt after Hurricane Ike and sales difficulties. The Bankruptcy Court valued Phase II and the unsold Phase I units at approximately $21.5 million, leading to a deficiency judgment of about $6 million for Davis. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's decision, finding its modified income approach to valuation, which rejected the cost approach due to market conditions and the non-fee simple interest in common elements, was supported by the record and legal precedent.

Condominium ValuationBankruptcy AppealDeficiency JudgmentReal Estate DevelopmentAppraisal MethodologyCost ApproachIncome ApproachProperty ValuationGalveston Real EstateChapter 11 Bankruptcy
References
55
Case No. 03-04-00427-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 12, 2006

Daniel O'Dell v. State

Appellant Daniel O'Dell was found guilty of harassment for making repeated telephone calls to the Texas Rehabilitation Commission (TRC) after his workplace injury claim was denied. O'Dell appealed his conviction, asserting seven points of error including the unconstitutionality of the harassment statute, denial of due process, and issues with witness presentation and judicial recusal. The Court of Appeals reviewed each point, concluding that the harassment statute was constitutional and finding no merit in O'Dell's claims regarding pretrial proceedings, discovery, or the recusal of Judge Clawson. The court also found no reversible error in the punishment phase, ultimately affirming the conviction.

Criminal HarassmentDue ProcessSpeedy TrialRight to CounselWitness RightsEvidence ExclusionJudicial RecusalContempt of CourtTexasWorkplace Injury
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 208 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