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. 2008 NY Slip Op 31457(U)
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2008

Parente v. 277 Park Avenue LLC

Plaintiff Dennis Párente, an operating engineer, sustained injuries after falling from a ladder while investigating a malfunctioning booster fan in an office leased by defendant Chase. The original Supreme Court ruling denied Párente's partial summary judgment motion under Labor Law § 240 (1) and dismissed the complaint. This Appellate Division order modified that decision, finding that Párente's activity constituted repair, not routine maintenance, thus making Labor Law § 240 (1) applicable and imposing absolute liability. Consequently, Párente's motion for summary judgment on this claim was granted, and the defendants' cross-motion for dismissal was denied. Other claims under Labor Law §§ 241 (6), 200, and common-law negligence were properly dismissed, and triable issues of fact remain concerning a third-party indemnification action.

Ladder FallBooster Fan RepairLabor Law § 240(1)Absolute LiabilitySummary Judgment MotionWorkplace SafetyWorker InjuryEmergency RepairThird-Party ActionIndemnification Claim
References
6
Case No. 03-22-00126-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2024

Greg Abbott in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Texas, Stephanie Muth in Her Official Capacity of Commissioner of the Department of Family and Protective Services, and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services v. Jane Doe, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Mary Doe, a Minor John Doe, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Mary Doe, a Minor And Dr. Megan Mooney

This case involves an appeal concerning a temporary injunction against the State of Texas for issuing a directive that classifies gender-affirming medical care for minors as child abuse. Appellees, including parents of a transgender adolescent and a psychologist, sued to enjoin the State from initiating child abuse investigations based on this directive. The trial court denied the State's plea to the jurisdiction and granted a temporary injunction. The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of jurisdiction and the injunction against the Department of Family and Protective Services and its Commissioner, concluding that the directive constituted an invalid rule under the APA and caused irreparable harm. However, it reversed the denial of jurisdiction and dismissed claims against the Governor, stating he lacked authority to control investigatory decisions.

Gender-affirming careChild abuse policyTemporary injunctionAdministrative Procedure ActUltra viresParental rightsEqual protectionDue processState government authorityJudicial review
References
62
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 26, 2011

K.B.J. v. T.J.

This is a contested divorce case where the Wife appealed the trial court's decision concerning primary residential parent, allocation of marital debt, and denial of spousal support. The trial court had found the Husband guilty of inappropriate marital conduct but made him the primary residential parent and denied spousal support to the Wife, while allocating significant marital debt to her. The appellate court reversed the decision on primary residential parent status and parenting schedule, designating the Wife as the primary residential parent with final decision-making authority. However, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decisions regarding the allocation of marital debt to the Wife and the denial of spousal support, citing the Husband's financial burden and the Wife's earning capacity. The case was remanded to the trial court to redetermine child support based on the modified parenting schedule.

DivorceChild CustodyParenting PlanMarital DebtSpousal SupportAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionPrimary Residential ParentParenting TimeFinancial Responsibility
References
15
Case No. E2013-01734-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 30, 2014

Joshua Wayne Taylor v. Mary Katherine Taylor

This is a post-divorce case concerning the modification of a permanent parenting plan and other relief for the parties' daughter. Mother initially sought to modify the residential parenting schedule, and Father counterclaimed for a modified schedule and a change in custody designation. The trial court found no material change in circumstances to warrant a change in the primary residential parent but found a material change supporting a modification of the residential schedule, significantly increasing Mother's parenting time. Father appealed this decision, raising issues regarding the material change in circumstances, failure to designate him as the primary residential parent, and failure to find Mother in contempt. Mother raised issues concerning deviations from child support guidelines and attorney's fees. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding no error in the denial of a custody change, the modification of the parenting schedule, or the handling of contempt and child support issues.

DivorceChild CustodyParenting Plan ModificationResidential ScheduleMaterial Change in CircumstancesChild Support GuidelinesContempt of CourtAttorney FeesAppellate ReviewAbuse of Discretion
References
38
Case No. E2020-01470-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 24, 2021

John William Owens v. Meredith Elizabeth Owens

This case is an appeal of a contentious divorce action. The trial court initially valued and divided the marital estate equally, awarded the marital home to the husband, granted equal parenting time, and designated the husband as the primary residential parent. The wife challenged these rulings, including the division and valuation of marital assets, the denial of alimony and attorney's fees, and the parenting plan. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decisions on property division, alimony, and attorney's fees. However, it reversed the trial court's designation of the husband as the primary residential parent and the equal parenting arrangement, remanding the case for the entry of a new parenting plan that names the wife as the primary residential parent with the husband receiving reasonable, though not equal, visitation.

Divorce LawMarital Asset DivisionChild Custody DisputeParental RightsAlimony and Spousal SupportAttorney's Fees AwardBusiness Valuation in DivorceAppellate Court DecisionFamily Court ProceedingsEquitable Distribution of Property
References
44
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. W2011-01649-COA-R3-JV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 17, 2013

Rolando Toyos v. Amanda G. Hammock

This case involves a direct appeal from the Juvenile Court for Shelby County concerning child custody, relocation, and attorney fees. The primary residential parent, Mother Amanda G. Hammock, notified Father Rolando Toyos of her intent to relocate. Father opposed the relocation and petitioned to be named the child's primary residential parent. The trial court found a material change in circumstances but determined that the child's best interests were served by Mother remaining the primary residential parent and allowed her relocation. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part. It affirmed the trial court's decision on Mother remaining the primary residential parent, citing Father's anger, its effect on his support system, Mother's remarriage and relocation desire, and Father's unilateral decision-making. However, the appellate court vacated the relocation order and remanded the issue for an evidentiary hearing, finding Father was effectively denied an opportunity to present evidence on relocation. Additionally, the Court of Appeals vacated and reinstated certain financial and decision-making provisions of the 2007 Consent Order, contingent on the relocation outcome. It upheld the trial court's orders for Father to attend parenting training and to address his nanny's attitude towards the Mother, but it vacated the prohibition on overnight visitation by opposite-sex partners in Father's home due to insufficient evidentiary foundation. Finally, the appellate court upheld the award of attorney fees to Mother.

Child CustodyParental RelocationBest Interests of the ChildVisitation RightsChild SupportAttorney FeesModification of Court OrdersJudicial DiscretionAppellate ProcedureEvidentiary Hearing
References
46
Case No. E2014-01385-COA-R3-JV-FILED-MARCH 31, 2015
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2015

In Re Jesslyn C.

This case involves an appeal from a juvenile court's decision regarding the modification of a permanent parenting plan for the minor child, Jesslyn C. The appellant, Kelvin C. (Father), sought to be named the primary residential parent and challenged the reduction of his co-parenting time. The appellee, Jacqueline D. (Mother), requested a modification of the co-parenting schedule. The trial court found a material change in circumstance due to the child's age and schooling, as well as the parents' difficulty cooperating. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no reversible error and concluding that the modification of the residential co-parenting schedule was in the child's best interest.

Parenting Plan ModificationChild CustodyResidential ScheduleBest Interest of the ChildMaterial Change in CircumstanceAppellate ReviewJuvenile CourtSullivan CountyCo-ParentingFather's Rights
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Leon RR

This dissenting opinion addresses a case concerning the permanent termination of parental rights for an infant, Leon, Jr., who had been in the physical custody of foster parents since 19 months of age. The dissent argues that the St. Lawrence County Department of Social Services consistently undermined the natural parental relationship, encouraging the foster parents and failing to make diligent efforts to assist the natural parents in maintaining their connection with the child. It criticizes the agency for not carrying out a plan for reintegration and for encouraging the infant's attachment to the foster parents while limiting natural parental visitation. The opinion asserts that the record is inadequate to support the termination of parental rights, highlighting that the natural parents had previously had their other children returned to them and had cooperated with caseworkers. The dissent concludes that the administrative agency's conduct amounted to an abuse of the temporary placement system and votes to reverse the order, seeking dismissal of the petition for permanent termination of parental rights and remittal for consideration of continued custody.

Parental Rights TerminationChild Custody DisputeFoster Care SystemChild WelfareFamily LawBest Interests of the ChildJudicial DissentDepartment of Social ServicesFamily Court ActParent-Child Relationship
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Angelia Lynette Maupin v. Paul Wayne Maupin

This appeal addresses a contested divorce judgment involving Angelia Lynette Maupin (Mother) and Paul Wayne Maupin (Father) concerning child custody, child support, and marital property division. The trial court designated Mother as the primary residential parent for their daughter and Father for their two sons, also ordering Mother to pay retroactive child support. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision that held Mother responsible for half of any mortgage deficiency in the event of foreclosure on the marital home, making Father solely liable for that debt. The appellate court further modified the judgment by mandating comprehensive family counseling for both parents and all three children to address damaged family relationships. In all other respects, including the residential parent designations and retroactive child support, the trial court's judgment was affirmed.

DivorceChild CustodyParental AlienationChild SupportMarital PropertyProperty DivisionRetroactive SupportFamily CounselingAppellate ReviewAbuse of Discretion
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 1,205 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