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. ADJ11280390
Regular
Mar 16, 2020

STEPHANIE ONG vs. BEVERLY HILLS BMW, THE HARTFORD

Applicant Stephanie Ong sought reconsideration of a prior decision in her workers' compensation case. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted this petition for reconsideration. The WCAB found it necessary to conduct further study of the factual and legal issues to issue a just and reasoned decision. All future correspondence regarding the petition must be filed directly with the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not with any district office or through e-filing.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTEPHANIE ONGBEVERLY HILLS BMWTHE HARTFORDSEDGWICK CMSPetition for Reconsiderationgranting reconsiderationfactual and legal issuesjust and reasoned decisionfurther proceedings
References
0
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 05774
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2017

Matter of Jessica U. (Stephanie U.)

The Chemung County Department of Social Services initiated proceedings to terminate Stephanie U.'s parental rights, alleging permanent neglect of her six children. Following a lengthy fact-finding hearing, the Family Court found five children permanently neglected, returned the oldest to the mother's care, ordered a one-year suspended judgment for two, and terminated parental rights for the three youngest children. Stephanie U. appealed this decision, challenging both the finding of permanent neglect and the termination of parental rights. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that the Department had made diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship and that the mother had failed to adequately plan for her children's future. The court also determined that the termination of parental rights for the three youngest children was in their best interests, noting their stability in preadoptive homes.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationDiligent EffortsChild CustodyFamily LawAppellate ReviewBest Interests of ChildrenFoster CareSuspended JudgmentSocial Services
References
10
Case No. E2004-00912-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2005

Stephanie Ann Troglen v. Vincent Lamar Troglen

This appeal in a divorce case from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County addressed challenges to child support and alimony. Vincent Lamar Troglen appealed the trial court's calculation of his child support obligation and its award of transitional alimony to Stephanie Ann Troglen. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee at Knoxville affirmed the trial court's child support amount of $755 per month. The court also affirmed the alimony award of $400 per month for five years, but modified its classification from transitional alimony to rehabilitative alimony, in line with Ms. Troglen's stated goal of furthering her education to enhance her earning capacity.

DivorceChild SupportAlimonySpousal SupportRehabilitative AlimonyTransitional AlimonyDisability BenefitsSocial Security BenefitsVeteran's BenefitsGross Income Calculation
References
24
Case No. 2020-06-0517
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 09, 2024

Taylor, Lauren v. John & Stephanie Ingram, LLC

Lauren Taylor sustained a severe traumatic brain injury from a horse kick while working out-of-state for John & Stephanie Ingram, LLC, based in Tennessee. A workers' compensation settlement was approved by the Tennessee trial court while Taylor was under a Georgia conservatorship. After the conservatorship was terminated by a Missouri court, Taylor repeatedly attempted to set aside the settlement, alleging fraud and invalidity of prior orders. The Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's denial of her motion, finding it untimely and lacking sufficient evidence of fraud, and upheld the trial court's exercise of subject matter jurisdiction.

Traumatic Brain InjuryWorkers' Compensation SettlementConservatorship TerminationMotion to Set AsideSubject Matter JurisdictionRule 60.02Timeliness of MotionAllegations of FraudFull Faith and CreditMulti-state Employment
References
17
Case No. 01-16-00584-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 19, 2018

Stephanie Montagne Zoanni v. Lemuel David Hogan

Justice Jennings dissents from the majority opinion, arguing that the majority misconstrues the Texas Defamation Mitigation Act (DMA). The dissent contends that appellee Lemuel David Hogan complied with the DMA's requirements when he filed his lawsuit against appellant Stephanie Montagne Zoanni, even when he later amended his petition to include additional defamatory statements. The dissenting justice argues that the DMA's plain language does not require a new request for correction for each new defamatory statement added to an ongoing lawsuit, and that the appropriate remedy for non-compliance is limited damages, not dismissal. The dissent concludes that the trial court correctly denied Zoanni's motion for a directed verdict.

Defamation Mitigation ActTexas LawAppellate CourtDissenting OpinionCivil ProcedureStatutory InterpretationDamagesExemplary DamagesRule 11 AgreementCause of Action
References
13
Case No. M2023-00812-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 26, 2024

Stephanie Garner v. State of Tennessee, and its agency, Tennessee Department of Correction

Plaintiff Stephanie Garner sued the State of Tennessee and its agency, the Tennessee Department of Correction, alleging disability discrimination for refusal to hire. A jury found in Garner's favor, awarding $10,000 for lost wages and $5,000 in compensatory damages. Garner's counsel then sought nearly $700,000 in attorney fees, which the trial court reduced by 25% to $511,620. The Department appealed the fee award, arguing it was excessive and based on an incorrect legal standard. The Court of Appeals vacated the attorney fee award and remanded the case, citing the trial court's failure to provide clear and thorough explanations for its decision based on the factors outlined in Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 8, RPC 1.5.

Disability DiscriminationAttorney FeesAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionTennessee Disability ActRule of Professional Conduct 1.5Excessive BillingVacate and RemandProportionality ArgumentLegal Standards
References
68
Case No. 11-06-00103-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2008

Stephanie Williams A/K/A Stephanie Scholler and Tim Williams v. William Colthurst, Yuko Colthurst, WGW Properties, Inc. D/B/A Century 21 Advantage, Tom DeWitt, Century 21 Real Estate Corporation, and Felix Kauffman

This appeal stems from a landlord-tenant dispute. The landlords (Colthurst) initially sued the tenants (Williams) for unpaid rent and property damage. The tenants counterclaimed, alleging wrongful withholding of their security deposit and a premises liability claim after Mrs. Williams was sexually assaulted in the leased home. The trial court granted partial summary judgment to the landlords on the unpaid rent claim and a directed verdict on the premises liability claim, with the jury ruling in favor of the landlords on the remaining issues. On appeal, the tenants challenged multiple aspects of the trial court's judgment, including the summary judgment, the directed verdict, and the jury's findings regarding the security deposit and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no reversible error in the handling of the various claims and upholding sanctions against the tenants' counsel for an intrinsic fraud allegation.

Landlord-Tenant DisputeUnpaid RentProperty DamageSecurity DepositPremises LiabilitySexual AssaultDirected VerdictSummary JudgmentAttorney's FeesPrejudgment Interest
References
37
Case No. 13-11-00198-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2011

in Re: New Hampshire Insurance Company, Chartis Claims, Inc., and Stephanie Stark

This case involves a petition for writ of mandamus filed by New Hampshire Insurance Company, Chartis Claims, Inc., and Stephanie Stark (relators) seeking to overturn a trial court's order denying their motion to dismiss. The underlying lawsuit was brought by Rosalinda Torres, who sued New Hampshire for bad faith, alleging a delay in providing workers' compensation death benefits after her husband, Lazaro Torres, died. New Hampshire argued that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Torres had not exhausted her administrative remedies by failing to obtain a formal determination from the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC) that her claim was compensable and benefits were owed. The Court of Appeals denied the petition for writ of mandamus, concluding that a DWC form signed by Torres, New Hampshire, and a DWC representative, authorizing the purchase of an annuity for death benefits, constituted an agreement that benefits were due, thus establishing the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction.

Workers' CompensationBad FaithMandamusSubject Matter JurisdictionExhaustion of Administrative RemediesTexas LawDeath BenefitsInsurance DisputeAdministrative ProcessAppellate Review
References
32
Case No. 2-09-349-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 28, 2010

Lasalle Gupton, Stephanie Patterson, Monique Gupton, and Yolanda Rawlston v. Rolando Beasley and Nathaniel Allen

The appellants, Lasalle Gupton, Stephanie Patterson, Monique Gupton, and Yolanda Rawlston (the Guptons), appealed a judgment in favor of appellee Nathaniel Allen regarding his unjust enrichment claim and an order to pay ad litem attorney fees for defendants Ronaldo Beasley and U.S. Affiliates, Inc. The case originated from a dispute over property fraudulently transferred from the Guptons. Allen, an intervenor and subsequent purchaser, sought reimbursement for improvements. The Court of Appeals determined that the Guptons' suit was a trespass to try title action, which limited Allen's recovery for improvements to the enhanced value of the property, not the cost of improvements. Since Allen failed to provide evidence of enhanced value, the court reversed the $14,500 judgment for Allen and rendered a judgment that he take nothing. The court affirmed the order requiring the Guptons to pay ad litem attorney fees, noting the Guptons' lack of legal authority or argument on that issue.

Trespass to try titleUnjust enrichmentProperty lawFraudulent deedAppellate reviewAttorney's feesAd litemReal estateProperty improvementsMeasure of damages
References
8
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 06966
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 18, 2018

Matter of Lacee L. (Dekodia L.)

Stephanie L., a mother with an intellectual disability, appealed a Family Court decision, affirmed by the Appellate Division, concerning the Administration for Children's Services' (ACS) efforts towards family reunification with her infant daughter, Lacee L. Stephanie L. argued that ACS failed to provide

Disability RightsAmericans with Disabilities ActFamily Court ActChild WelfareFamily ReunificationReasonable EffortsReasonable AccommodationParental RightsNeglect ProceedingsAppellate Review
References
30
Showing 1-10 of 76 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