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. 03-02-00524-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 24, 2003

Citizens Insurance Company of America Citizens, Inc. Harold E. Riley and Mark A. Oliver v. Dr. Fernando Hakim Daccach

This case addresses an interlocutory appeal concerning the certification of a class action. Appellants, including Citizens Insurance Company of America, challenged the district court's decision to certify a class action brought by Dr. Fernando Hakim Daccach. Dr. Daccach alleged that Citizens unlawfully sold unregistered securities in Texas, specifically certain life insurance policies (CICA policies) that allowed assignment of benefits to offshore trusts for stock purchases. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's class certification order, with a modification to the class definition. The court found that all class certification requirements were met, including proper class definition, the applicability of Texas law without a "most significant relationship" analysis, and the predominance of common issues.

Class ActionSecurities Act ViolationsTexas Securities ActClass CertificationChoice of LawPredominance of Common IssuesTypicalityAdequacy of RepresentationSuperiority of Class ActionInterlocutory Appeal
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Citizens Insurance Co. of America v. Hakim Daccach

This case concerns an interlocutory appeal by Citizens Insurance Company of America and related parties, collectively "Citizens," challenging a district court's order certifying a class action. The underlying suit was initiated by Dr. Fernando Hakim Daccach, alleging that Citizens unlawfully sold unregistered securities, specifically CICA life insurance policies, from Texas without complying with the Texas Securities Act. Citizens contested the class certification on grounds of class definition, an inadequate choice-of-law analysis, and unmet class certification requirements. The appellate court modified the class definition to resolve potential "fail-safe" issues and affirmed the district court's application of Texas law. Ultimately, the court found no abuse of discretion in the certification of the class, affirming the district court's order as modified.

Class ActionSecurities LawTexas Securities ActClass Certification RequirementsChoice of LawPredominance of Common IssuesTypicalityAdequacy of RepresentationSuperiority of Class ActionInterlocutory Appeal
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Road v. State

The appellate court reversed a Supreme Court order, dismissing a complaint against the Town of Colonie, which was filed by Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Road and its members. Plaintiffs had sued the County of Albany regarding land ownership and the Town of Colonie for tax refunds. The Supreme Court had denied the Town's motion to dismiss, despite a significant delay in serving the complaint. However, the appellate court found that plaintiffs failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay and did not demonstrate the merit of their claims against the Town. Additionally, the complaint was deemed deficient for non-compliance with RPAPL 1515 and General Associations Law § 12, leading to its dismissal against the Town.

Delay in serviceMotion to dismissReal property tax assessmentRPAPL article 15 actionRPTL article 7 proceedingUnincorporated associationFailure to state a claimAppellate reviewProcedural deficiencyComplaint dismissal
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Receiver for Citizen's National Assurance Co. v. Hatley

Johnny Ray Hatley was injured in a work-related truck accident and settled a third-party claim for $85,000, from which the Receiver for Citizen’s National Assurance Company received $16,000. Hatley then pursued workers' compensation benefits, and a jury found him totally and permanently incapacitated. The trial court awarded Hatley approximately $78,000 in benefits, rejecting the Receiver's argument that the third-party settlement should offset the workers' compensation recovery under former article 8307, section 6a. The Receiver appealed, contending the statutory offset was mandatory and the release had no legal effect or lacked consideration. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that the release explicitly waived the Receiver's statutory rights and was supported by valid consideration, thereby precluding the application of the offset.

Workers' CompensationThird-Party SettlementStatutory OffsetRelease of ClaimsContract InterpretationConsiderationTexas LawSubrogation RightsReimbursement RightsAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. E2016-01444-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 21, 2017

Kimberly Giles Rollick v. Citizens Bank of Blount County

Kimberly Giles Rollick filed a complaint against three entities alleging breach of contract, fraud, racketeering, usury, and truth in lending violations. The trial court granted motions to dismiss for all defendants. Rollick appealed the dismissals concerning J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Wilson & Associates PLLC; however, Citizens Bank of Blount County was dismissed from the appeal due to an untimely notice. On appeal, Rollick argued improper dismissal of CBBC and the trial court's failure to provide hearing transcripts. The Court of Appeals found no merit to her arguments and affirmed the trial court's judgments, also noting Rollick waived arguments against the remaining defendants by failing to provide support.

Appellate ProcedureMotion to DismissTimely AppealJurisdictionPro Se LitigantWaiver of ArgumentBreach of ContractFraud AllegationsRacketeeringUsury
References
14
Case No. 3-92-298-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 07, 1993

Receiver for Citizen's National Assurance Company, an Impaired Company v. Johnny Ray Hatley

This case involves an appeal by the Receiver for Citizen's National Assurance Company (appellant) against Johnny Ray Hatley (appellee) regarding workers' compensation benefits. Hatley was injured in a truck accident and received a third-party settlement, part of which went to the Receiver. The Receiver had signed a release of all claims and rights but argued that the settlement should be treated as an advance against future workers' compensation benefits under former article 8307, section 6a of the workers' compensation law, contending the release was not legally effective or lacked consideration. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment in favor of Hatley, ruling that the release constituted a specific waiver by the Receiver of its statutory rights and was supported by valid consideration.

Workers' Compensation LawThird-Party LiabilitySettlement AgreementStatutory OffsetContractual ReleaseConsideration in ContractsSubrogation WaiverReimbursement RightsAppellate ReviewTravis County District Court
References
7
Case No. CA 15-01862
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 2016

WELLSVILLE CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBL v. WAL-MART STORES, INC.

The Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, reversed a lower court's judgment denying a petition from Wellsville Citizens for Responsible Development, Inc. The petitioner sought to annul a negative declaration issued by the Town Board of Wellsville regarding a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter, citing violations of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The court found that the Town Board failed to conduct a "hard look" review concerning the project's impact on wildlife, the community character of the Village of Wellsville, and surface water, particularly in relation to an adjacent golf course reconstruction. Consequently, the negative declaration was annulled, and the petition was granted.

SEQRAEnvironmental ImpactNegative DeclarationHard Look ReviewWildlife ConservationCommunity PlanningSurface Water ProtectionLand UseAppellate ReviewArticle 78 Proceeding
References
15
Case No. 07-06-0385-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 2008

Paul Martin Clark and Black Citizens for Justice, Law and Order, Inc. v. Gladys Elaine Blanton Jenkins

Paul Martin Clark and Black Citizens For Justice, Law and Order, Inc. appealed a judgment rendered in favor of Gladys Elaine Blanton Jenkins in a libel action. Appellants argued that defamatory statements against Jenkins were absolutely privileged and that there was insufficient evidence to establish actual malice. The statements, contained in a memorandum to a U.S. Congressman and the DOJ, falsely accused Jenkins, an Athens City Council member, of being a convicted felon for prostitution and drugs and demanded her immediate removal from office. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the statements were subject only to a qualified privilege and that there was clear and convincing evidence that Clark acted with actual malice.

LibelDefamationActual MaliceQualified PrivilegeAbsolute PrivilegeTexas ConstitutionFirst AmendmentPetition ClausePublic FigureFreedom of Speech
References
58
Case No. 03-14-00718-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 04, 2014

Citizens Against the Landfill in Hempstead Michael McCall Wayne Knox And the City of Hempstead v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Pintail Landfill, L.L.C.

This case involves an appeal by Citizens Against the Landfill in Hempstead (CALH), Michael McCall, Wayne Knox, and the City of Hempstead (collectively, Appellants) against the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and Pintail Landfill, L.L.C. (Appellees). The appeal challenges the district court's judgment upholding TCEQ's decision to issue Registration No. 40259 to Pintail Landfill, L.L.C. for a transfer station/materials recovery facility. The appellants argue that the facility requires a full permit, not just a registration, under TCEQ rules, and that they were denied due process without an opportunity for a contested case hearing. They also contend that TCEQ violated its own policy by allowing an excessive number of Notices of Deficiency (NODs) during the application review process. The district court affirmed TCEQ's decision, which the appellants are now challenging.

Landfill PermitTransfer StationRecycling FacilityEnvironmental LawTCEQ RulesDue ProcessAdministrative Procedure ActNotice of DeficiencyWaste ManagementTexas Appeals Court
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Workforce Commission v. Olivas

Ms. Maria Elena Olivas, a former employee of the Texas Workforce Commission, filed a workers' compensation claim after developing injuries in March 2008. She was subsequently dismissed from employment in May 2009, leading her to file a suit against the Commission for retaliatory discharge. The Commission filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting sovereign immunity and arguing that Section 311.034 of the Texas Government Code mandated an unequivocal waiver of immunity, which it claimed was absent in the anti-retaliation provisions of Chapter 451. The trial court denied the Commission's plea. On appeal, the Commission contended that Section 311.034 abrogated existing Texas Supreme Court precedent (*Kerrville State Hosp. v. Fernandez*) that recognized a waiver of sovereign immunity for such claims against state agencies. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that the State Applications Act (SAA) still provides a clear and unambiguous waiver of sovereign immunity for retaliation claims against state agencies, and that neither Section 311.034 nor the *Travis Central Appraisal District v. Norman* decision altered this established legal analysis.

Sovereign ImmunityRetaliatory DischargeWorkers' Compensation ClaimPlea to JurisdictionAppellate ReviewGovernment CodeLabor CodeLegislative WaiverState AgenciesStatutory Construction
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 531 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