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. 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. 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. 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. M2013-01019-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2014

Joe Houghland Hooper, III v. Amanda Marie Bures Hooper

This divorce case involves an appeal by Father regarding the denial of his motion to suspend Mother's parenting time and the reduction of her child support, as well as a request to modify the parenting schedule. Mother cross-appealed the trial court's calculation of her parenting time days for child support determination. The Court of Appeals found an error in the trial court's calculation of Mother's residential parenting days, leading to the vacating of the child support award and a remand for recalculation. The judgment was affirmed in all other respects, including the denial of the motion to suspend parenting time and the existing parenting schedule.

Divorce ActionChild Support CalculationParenting ScheduleAppellate ReviewChild CustodyMarital DissolutionParenting PlanTrial Court ErrorRemand for RecalculationBest Interest of the Child
References
7
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. 2022 NY Slip Op 22387 [77 Misc 3d 20]
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 20, 2022

Singletary v. Residential Mgt. Inc.

The Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, affirmed a judgment against Residential Management Inc. et al., landlords, for civil penalties. The initial decision found the landlords liable for failing to correct housing violations, as established by tenant testimony, photographic evidence, and subsequent inspections by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD). The landlords' defense of lack of access was rejected, as the record indicated multiple access dates and testimony from their own workers inconsistent with denial of access. Furthermore, the court found the landlords' argument regarding the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause unpreserved and without merit, reasoning that the penalties served a remedial purpose to ensure compliance with housing standards. The court also determined that the penalty schedule was not grossly disproportionate to the offense, and landlords had the ability to mitigate fines by correcting violations promptly.

Housing ViolationsCivil PenaltiesLandlord LiabilityExcessive Fines ClauseEighth AmendmentAdministrative Code § 27-2115Lack of Access DefenseAppellate ReviewRemedial PurposeHousing Maintenance Standards
References
9
Case No. M2014-02293-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 09, 2016

William Lane Lanier v. Corie J. Lanier

This case involves an appeal concerning the modification of a parenting plan between divorced parents, Corie J. Lanier (Mother) and William Lane Lanier (Father). Following their 2007 divorce, both parents sought modifications to the initial parenting plan due to changed circumstances. The trial court ultimately designated Father as the primary residential parent, granted him sole decision-making authority, and adjusted Mother's parenting time. On appeal, both parties raised numerous issues, challenging findings regarding material changes, best interests, and decision-making. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment in most respects but vacated and remanded the portion of the decision pertaining to the children's vacation schedules for further consideration.

Family LawChild CustodyParenting Plan ModificationChild Support CalculationMaterial Change of CircumstanceBest Interest of the ChildDecision-Making AuthorityParenting TimeAppellate ReviewAbuse of Discretion
References
18
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. M2018-01031-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 2019

Angela Charlene Iveson v. Jeffrey Wayne Iveson

This appeal concerns a post-divorce effort to modify a residential parenting schedule. Mother filed a petition seeking to reduce and restrict Father's parenting time and increase his child support obligation, citing concerns about Stepmother and Stepsister's behavior and their impact on the Child. The Trial Court found a material change in circumstances, reducing Father's parenting days and requiring his parenting time to be outside the presence of Stepmother and Stepsister. The Trial Court also increased Father's child support obligation based on his current income, declining to use a three-year average, and required him to pay a pro rata share of uncovered medical expenses. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Trial Court's judgment in its entirety, finding sufficient evidentiary basis and consistency with applicable law.

DivorceChild CustodyParenting PlanChild SupportModificationAppellate ReviewBest Interest of the ChildParental RightsStep-relativesDomestic Violence
References
19
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
Showing 1-10 of 2,842 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