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. 03-01-00491-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2002

West Orange-Cove Consolidated Independent School District Coppell Independent School District La Porte Independent School District And Port Neches-Groves Independent School District v. Felipe Alanis, Texas Commissioner of Education The Texas Education Agency Carol Keeton Rylander, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts And the Texas State Board of Education Alvarado I.S.D. Anthony I.S.D. Aubrey I.S.D. Bangs I.S.D.

Four Texas school districts, led by West Orange-Cove Consolidated Independent School District, appealed the dismissal of their action seeking a declaratory judgment that the state's school finance system is unconstitutional. The districts contended that the $1.50 tax cap had become a de facto floor, forcing them to tax at the maximum allowable rate to provide education, thereby constituting an unconstitutional state ad valorem tax. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, ruling that the districts failed to state a viable cause of action because they did not allege they were forced to tax at the cap specifically to provide the constitutionally-mandated 'accredited education.' The court also found the claim unripe, emphasizing that the focus should be on whether the state's requirements forced a lack of meaningful discretion in setting tax rates for an accredited education, not on a desired level of education or the number of districts taxing at the cap.

School Finance ReformConstitutional ChallengeAd Valorem TaxationEducation FundingDeclaratory JudgmentAppellate JurisdictionRipeness DoctrineTexas Constitution Article VII, Section 1Texas Constitution Article VIII, Section 1-eProperty Tax Cap
References
30
Case No. ADJ6674320, ADJ4552593
Regular
Apr 23, 2018

KIMBERLY DE NOVA-JOY vs. SANTA PAULA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT, YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

In *De Nova-Joy v. Santa Paula Elementary School District*, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration of a February 2, 2018 decision. The WCAB found reconsideration necessary to allow further study of the factual and legal issues to ensure a just decision. All future correspondence and filings related to the petition must be directed to the WCAB Commissioners in San Francisco, not district offices or e-filed via EAMS. Trial-level documents unrelated to the petition should continue to be e-filed, but proposed settlements require notification to the Appeals Board as a WCJ cannot act on them during reconsideration.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationGrant of ReconsiderationSanta Paula Elementary School DistrictYork Risk Services GroupADJ6674320ADJ4552593San FranciscoEAMSAdministrative Director
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mount Sinai Union Free School District v. Board of Education Port Jefferson Public Schools

Mount Sinai and Port Jefferson School Districts had a long-standing contract for Mt. Sinai to send its high school students to Port Jefferson. Following a deterioration of relations and an increase in Mt. Sinai's student population, Mt. Sinai decided to build its own high school. New York Education Law § 3014-c was enacted, requiring sending districts to consider teachers from receiving districts as their own employees. Mt. Sinai challenged this statute, alleging various constitutional violations. The court dismissed claims by teacher, parent/student, and taxpayer plaintiffs for lack of standing, and then dismissed the remaining Contract Clause claim by Mt. Sinai, granting summary judgment to the defendants.

School DistrictsTeacher TenureEducation LawContract ClauseDue ProcessEqual ProtectionStandingAbstention DoctrineSummary JudgmentFederal Civil Procedure
References
17
Case No. 14-07-01038-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 28, 2009

Erik Larsen v. Sante Fe Independent School District

Erik Larsen appealed a summary judgment granted to Santa Fe Independent School District (the District) in his lawsuit for retaliatory discharge. Larsen claimed he was terminated after filing a workers' compensation claim. The appeals court first addressed the District's contention that Larsen failed to exhaust administrative remedies, concluding that such exhaustion was not a jurisdictional prerequisite for his claim. However, on the merits of the summary judgment, the court affirmed the trial court's decision. It found that Larsen failed to present evidence that the District's neutral absence control policy was not uniformly enforced, thereby failing to controvert the District's legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for his termination.

Retaliatory DischargeWorkers' Compensation ClaimSummary Judgment AppealAdministrative Remedies ExhaustionAt-Will EmploymentSchool District PolicyAbsence Control PolicyTexas Labor CodeTexas Education CodeFMLA
References
43
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Agyeman v. Roosevelt Union Free School District

Plaintiff Ak-ousa Agyeman, an elementary school teacher, filed a civil rights action against the Roosevelt Union Free School District and several individuals, alleging violations of her First Amendment rights and retaliation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York Civil Service Law § 75-b. Agyeman claimed she was retaliated against for engaging in protected speech, specifically through internal emails and a letter to the New York State Education Department, regarding student needs, District policies, and alleged legal violations. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing her speech was not constitutionally protected. The Court granted the defendants' motion, concluding that Agyeman's speech was made as a public employee performing official duties, not as a private citizen, and therefore was not protected by the First Amendment. Consequently, the Section 1983 claim was dismissed, and the remaining state law claim was dismissed without prejudice for re-filing in state court.

First Amendment retaliationPublic employee speechCivil rights actionSummary judgmentNew York State law claimDismissal without prejudiceTeacher employment disputeSchool district liabilityFreedom of speechOfficial duties
References
56
Case No. 03-04-00744-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 12, 2006

Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas v. North East Independent School District and Dr. Richard A. Middleton, in His Official Capacity as Custodian of Public Records for North East Independent School District

This case addresses whether a memorandum from a school principal to a teacher, which outlines complaints and directs corrective actions, qualifies as a confidential "document evaluating the performance of a teacher" under Texas Education Code Ann. § 21.355. The Attorney General argued it was merely a reprimand and therefore not confidential, while the North East Independent School District (NEISD) contended it was an evaluation. The district court sided with NEISD, granting their motion for summary judgment. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, concluding that the memorandum's content, including the principal's judgment on performance issues, corrective directives, and provisions for further review, indeed constituted an evaluation, thereby making it confidential and exempt from public disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act.

Public Information ActTeacher Performance EvaluationConfidentialitySchool District RecordsSummary Judgment ReviewStatutory InterpretationGovernment TransparencyEducation CodeAppellate ReviewTexas Law
References
18
Case No. 03-02-00652-CV; 03-02-00693-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 03, 2003

in Re Marble Falls Independent School District

This case concerns a challenge to the Marble Falls Independent School District's mandatory extracurricular activity drug-testing policy. Eddie Shell, on behalf of his minor children, argued the policy infringed upon their religious freedom, privacy rights, and due process under the Texas Constitution, citing the consumption of wine for religious observances. The trial court initially granted a temporary injunction against the school district. However, the Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, reversed this decision, finding that Shell failed to establish a probable right to recover. The appellate court concluded that the drug-testing policy did not violate constitutional provisions regarding religious freedom, due process, or privacy, as it was a neutral, generally applicable law rationally related to legitimate state interests in student safety and health.

Drug TestingExtracurricular ActivitiesReligious FreedomPrivacy RightsDue ProcessTexas ConstitutionTemporary InjunctionAbuse of DiscretionSchool PolicyAppellate Review
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

D.S.A., Inc. v. Hillsboro Independent School District

This is the second appeal concerning a poorly-constructed elementary school. Hillsboro Independent School District (HISD) contracted with D.S.A., Inc. (DSA), a construction management firm, for the construction of Jane Lane Elementary School, which resulted in significant structural problems. HISD sued DSA for breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and DTPA violations. After a complex appellate history, including a Texas Supreme Court reversal remanding for damage recalculation, the current appeal addresses whether damages for foundation drainage were properly awarded and if prejudgment interest was correctly recalculated. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the drainage damages based on the Supreme Court's prior finding and affirming the recalculation of prejudgment interest, while denying HISD's request for appellate attorney's fees.

Construction DefectsBreach of ContractNegligent MisrepresentationDeceptive Trade Practices ActAppellate ProcedureLaw of the Case DoctrinePrejudgment InterestDamages CalculationRemandJury Findings
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

La Villa Independent School District v. Gomez Garza Design, Inc.

La Villa Independent School District appealed a judgment in favor of Gomez Garza Design, Inc. for breach of contract. The case stemmed from a 1995 agreement for architectural services, where a dispute arose when La Villa hired another firm for a new elementary school project after Garza Design had commenced preliminary work under the existing contract. The trial court's judgment, based on a jury finding, awarded Garza Design $52,850.00. The appellate court affirmed the decision, ruling that sufficient evidence supported the jury's conclusions regarding the existence of a valid contract, the superintendent's authority to bind the school district, and the calculation of damages. The court also determined that the contract did not violate the Professional Services Procurement Act.

Breach of contractArchitectural servicesSchool districtSuperintendent authorityContract validityProfessional Services Procurement ActDamagesJury findingsJudgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV)Estoppel
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Austin Independent School District v. Maynard

Billy Maynard sued the Austin Independent School District for workers’ compensation after sustaining a back injury in 1981 while unloading brush. The school district argued Maynard engaged in injurious practices by failing to follow medical advice to exercise and lose weight, which contributed to his incapacity. The jury found Maynard did not follow the advice and that it contributed 65% to his incapacity. However, the district court disregarded these jury findings because the school district failed to secure a finding that Maynard's failure was wilful. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment.

Injurious PracticesWeight LossExercise RegimeBack InjuryWilful RefusalJury FindingsDisregarded VerdictAppellate ReviewTexas Civil StatuteMedical Advice Non-compliance
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 5,863 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