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

Lavender v. Hofer

This personal injury case originated from an intersection collision resulting in the death of June Hofer. The initial defendant, Robert W. Springate, passed away, leading to his daughter, Sharon Lavender, being substituted as his personal representative. The core issues on appeal involved the recovery of punitive damages against the deceased tort-feasor's estate and the appellees' (June Hofer's parents) entitlement to damages for mental anguish and loss of companionship. The appellate court determined that punitive damages are not recoverable against a deceased tort-feasor's estate, reasoning that the purposes of punishment and deterrence cease upon death. However, the court affirmed the award for mental anguish and loss of companionship, citing a recent Texas Supreme Court decision.

Personal InjuryWrongful DeathPunitive DamagesExemplary DamagesSurvival StatuteMental AnguishLoss of CompanionshipDeceased Tort-feasor EstateAppellate ReviewDamages Award
References
63
Case No. 13-04-358-CV, 13-04-224-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Montemayor v. Ortiz

This consolidated appeal involves a declaratory judgment action and counterclaims for damages. Appellants G. Xavier Montemayor and Franklin T. Graham Jr. sought to collect a 1990 judgment against Jose Antonio Ortiz Fernandez and Jose Antonio Ortiz Celada by claiming Becky Ortiz's business, Schor's, was community property subject to levy. They obtained an ex parte receivership, prompting Ortiz to file counterclaims for wrongful conduct including abuse of process, malicious prosecution, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court granted summary judgments for Ortiz, ruling the 1990 debt was contractual and Schor's was her special community property, not liable for Celada's debt. A jury awarded Ortiz actual and punitive damages on her counterclaims. On appeal, the court affirmed the summary judgments in favor of Ortiz, but reversed and rendered the judgment for damages, finding no legal sufficiency of evidence for any of Ortiz's tort claims, thereby also precluding punitive damages and mental anguish awards.

Declaratory JudgmentEx Parte ReceivershipCommunity PropertySpecial Community PropertyTortious ConductAbuse of ProcessMalicious ProsecutionDefamationIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressSummary Judgment Review
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pollard v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours, Inc.

This case concerns the determination of compensatory damages and front pay for Plaintiff Sharon Pollard against Defendant E.I. DuPont de Nemours, Inc. The Court previously found DuPont liable for Title VII discrimination and intentional infliction of emotional distress. After a damages hearing in July 2003, the Court concluded Plaintiff could not return to work due to severe anxiety and depression stemming from harassment and DuPont's insufficient response. The Court awarded Plaintiff $1,004,374.00 in front pay through age 65, determining she had adequately mitigated her damages. Additionally, $950,000.00 in compensatory damages was awarded for emotional distress, with a future hearing scheduled to determine punitive damages.

Employment DiscriminationTitle VIISexual HarassmentCompensatory DamagesFront PayIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderMajor Depressive DisorderMitigation of DamagesExpert Witness Testimony
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Twin City Fire Insurance Co. v. Davis

Faith Davis, an employee, suffered a back injury and filed a workers' compensation claim with Twin City Fire Insurance Company. They settled, agreeing to pay future medical expenses. Davis subsequently claimed for a prescribed hot tub, which Twin City denied after conducting an investigation. Davis filed suit, alleging bad faith and other violations. The jury found bad faith and awarded actual damages for the withheld medical expense but declined to award mental anguish damages, while also assessing punitive damages. The trial court initially denied punitive damages, but the court of appeals reinstated them. The Texas Supreme Court reversed the punitive damages award, holding that an independent injury, separate from the workers' compensation benefits, is required to recover punitive damages, which Davis failed to establish. The Court affirmed the judgment for actual damages, a statutory penalty, prejudgment interest, postjudgment interest, and attorney's fees, but eliminated the punitive damages.

Insurance Bad FaithPunitive DamagesIndependent InjuryActual DamagesContract DamagesTort DamagesExclusivity ProvisionStatutory PenaltyAttorney's FeesMedical Expenses
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cush-Crawford v. Adchem Corp.

This case involves allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation brought by Plaintiff Tonia Cush-Crawford against Defendant Adchem Corp. A jury found in favor of the Plaintiff on her hostile environment sexual harassment claim under Title VII, awarding $0 in compensatory damages but $100,000 in punitive damages. The Defendant moved to set aside the verdict and vacate the punitive damages award, arguing that punitive damages cannot be awarded without compensatory damages, an issue of first impression in this circuit. The Court denied the Defendant's motion, ruling that an award of compensatory damages is not a prerequisite for punitive damages in Title VII cases. The Plaintiff's motion for a new trial on damages was also denied, and the Court awarded attorney's fees and costs to the Plaintiff.

Title VIISexual HarassmentHostile Work EnvironmentPunitive DamagesCompensatory DamagesAttorney's FeesFederal Civil RightsEmployment LawRule 50 MotionRule 59 Motion
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hutchison v. Pyburn

Plaintiffs William and Jo Lynn Hutchison purchased a house and lot from defendants Robert and Carol Pyburn. The property, built by defendant Jack Williams, was later discovered to have an unapproved sewage disposal system due to insufficient topsoil, a fact known to the defendants. Plaintiffs sued for fraud and misrepresentation, and the Chancery Court of Davidson County awarded rescission of the deed and $5,000.00 in punitive damages, along with incidental damages. Defendants appealed the award of punitive damages. The appellate court affirmed the decision, ruling that punitive damages are available in equity for fraudulent conduct and are not inconsistent with the remedy of rescission. The court also clarified that proving entitlement to rescission and incidental damages satisfies the 'actual damages' prerequisite for punitive damages.

FraudRealty SaleRescission of DeedPunitive DamagesEquitable RemediesElection of RemediesActual DamagesMisrepresentationProperty DefectsTennessee Law
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sherrod v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc.

This case concerns post-trial motions in a civil action where plaintiff Howell H. Sherrod, Jr. sued defendant Piedmont Aviation, Inc. for unjust discrimination, wrongful ejection, and intentional infliction of mental distress. A jury awarded Sherrod $100,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages. The defendant moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and, alternatively, for a new trial, primarily contesting the punitive damages award under Illinois and federal law. The Court denied the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings on punitive damages for the federal and wrongful ejection claims. However, the Court found the damage awards excessive and ordered a remittitur of $79,000 for compensatory damages and $85,000 for punitive damages, with a new trial on damages to be granted if the plaintiff does not accept the reduction.

Punitive DamagesCompensatory DamagesRemittiturDirected VerdictJudgment Notwithstanding Verdict (JNOV)New TrialAirline DiscriminationWrongful EjectionIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressFederal Aviation Act
References
39
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

West v. Pratt

This appeal addresses the allocation of compensatory and punitive damages between a liability insurer and an uninsured motorist carrier in Tennessee. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, the uninsured motorist carrier for plaintiffs Glenn and Shari West, challenged Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company's, the liability insurer for defendant Horace Pratt, decision to apportion its policy limits between compensatory and punitive damages. State Farm argued this allocation improperly shifted responsibility for punitive damages to them, a result prohibited by Tennessee public policy concerning uninsured motorist coverage. The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' rulings, holding that a liability carrier must first satisfy compensatory damage awards to the extent of its limits before applying any funds to punitive damages, unless the policy explicitly states otherwise. This decision underscores the state's public policy against indirectly burdening uninsured motorist carriers with punitive damage obligations.

Allocation of damagesPunitive damagesCompensatory damagesUninsured motorist coverageUnderinsured motorist coverageLiability insuranceInsurance policy limitsPublic policyTennessee lawStatutory interpretation
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hammerly Oaks, Inc. v. Edwards

Darrell Edwards, a resident of an apartment complex owned by Hammerly Oaks, Inc., was brutally assaulted in a vacant apartment adjoining his. The assailants included Roman Gonzales, an independent contractor hired by Hammerly Oaks to clean carpets. Edwards sued Hammerly Oaks, and a jury found negligence and gross negligence, awarding compensatory and punitive damages. The trial court subsequently disregarded the findings of gross negligence and punitive damages. The court of appeals modified the trial court's judgment to award punitive damages, concluding that the leasing agent, Marilyn Montgomery, was a vice principal and grossly negligent for failing to warn Edwards of threats made by Gonzales. The Supreme Court of Texas reversed the court of appeals' judgment regarding punitive damages. The Court held that Marilyn Montgomery was not a vice principal, and the jury was not properly instructed or asked to consider nondelegable duties or premises defects concerning other employees (Rose Britton, Frank Smotek). Consequently, the Supreme Court modified the court of appeals' judgment by deleting the award of punitive damages and affirmed the judgment in all other respects.

Punitive DamagesGross NegligenceCorporate LiabilityVice PrincipalRespondeat SuperiorNondelegable DutyPremises LiabilityApartment ComplexAssaultEmployee Conduct
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 01, 2000

Hall v. Diamond Shamrock Refining Co., LP

This appeal arises from a survivor's cause of action for punitive damages following a refinery explosion at Diamond Shamrock's McKee Plant in Moore County, Texas, on April 1, 1996, which resulted in the death of employee Charles Otis Hall. The explosion was attributed to defective system design, inadequate procedures, untrained personnel, and covered drain valves. Donna Hall, Charles's widow, filed suit for punitive damages, and a jury awarded $42.5 million. The trial court capped the damages at $200,000, prompting Hall's appeal and Diamond Shamrock's cross-appeal. The appellate court found sufficient evidence of gross negligence against Diamond Shamrock. It also affirmed the applicability and constitutionality of the punitive damages cap and rejected Hall's waiver argument. However, the court found that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of compensatory damages, which were relevant for calculating the punitive damages cap under the statutory formula. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial.

Punitive DamagesGross NegligenceWorkers' CompensationStatutory Damages CapAppellate ReviewExtreme RiskConscious IndifferenceRefinery ExplosionWrongful DeathEvidentiary Error
References
27
Showing 1-10 of 4,068 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