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. W2012-00469-COA-R3-PT
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 17, 2012

In the Matter of: D.C., Jr., G.C., D.C., and H.C.

This case concerns the appeal of D.C., Sr. against the termination of his parental rights to his four children (D.C., Jr., G.C., D.C., and H.C.). The Tennessee Department of Children’s Services (DCS) removed the children due to neglect and abuse. The juvenile court terminated his parental rights on grounds of abandonment (failure to provide a suitable home), substantial noncompliance with the permanency plan, and persistent conditions. The Court of Appeals affirmed the termination, agreeing with the juvenile court on most grounds but reversing the finding on abandonment by failure to support, concluding that even minimal payments were token support and that the father ceased payments upon moving to Texas. The appellate court found overwhelming evidence that termination was in the children's best interest.

Parental Rights TerminationChild NeglectChild AbuseAbandonmentPermanency Plan NoncompliancePersistent ConditionsJuvenile Court AppealChild SupportBest Interest of ChildFoster Care
References
39
Case No. No. 08-07-00346-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2010

W.C. LaRock, D.C., P.C. D/B/A Auto & Work Injury Clinic and Maria Del Carmen Gallardo/Rosemary Smith v. Rosemary Smith/W.C. LaRock, D.C., P.C. D/B/A Auto & Work Injury Clinic and Maria Del Carmen Gallardo

Rosemary Smith, an El Paso Police Officer, sued W.C. LaRock, D.C., P.C., d/b/a Auto & Work Injury Clinic, and its employee Maria Gallardo, alleging negligence after a physical therapy session aggravated a prior back injury. The City of El Paso, Smith's worker's compensation subrogee, joined as a plaintiff. The jury found Gallardo negligent, awarding Smith $488,000, which the trial court reduced to $339,983.58. Both parties appealed. The Court of Appeals found the expert testimony on causation insufficient to establish that Gallardo's therapy proximately caused Smith's reherniation, as the expert only stated it was "possible." The court reversed the trial court's judgment.

Medical MalpracticeNegligenceCausationExpert TestimonyPhysical TherapyHerniated DiscSpinal SurgeryProximate CauseLegal SufficiencyAppeal
References
33
Case No. 02-13-00149-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2013

in the Interest of A.D.C. and J.D.C., Children

This case concerns J.W.S. (Father)'s appeal of the termination of his parental rights to his two children, A.D.C. and J.D.C. The children were initially removed from Mother's care in November 2011 due to a violent domestic dispute and long-standing neglect. Father, despite prior knowledge of endangering conditions, failed to protect the children and did not consistently comply with court-ordered services, including a critical batterer's intervention program. The appellate court upheld the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence that Father allowed the children to remain in dangerous surroundings and failed to meet his service plan obligations. The court also determined that termination was in the children's best interest, emphasizing their need for stability and specialized care which was provided by their foster family, in contrast to Father's unstable living situation and history of domestic violence.

Parental Rights TerminationChild NeglectDomestic ViolenceChild Protective ServicesSufficiency of EvidenceBest Interest of ChildFamily LawAppellate ReviewFoster CareService Plan Non-Compliance
References
28
Case No. No. E2003-01832-COA-R3-PT
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 07, 2004

In Re: C.D.C., Jr.

The case "In re C.D.C., JR." concerns the termination of parental rights of Christopher Dean Collins, Sr. to his son, C.D.C., Jr. The Juvenile Court for Greene County terminated the father's rights based on statutory grounds of willful non-support, non-visitation, and the child's best interests. The father appealed, arguing he was unaware of his son's location. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee at Knoxville affirmed the lower court's decision, citing the father's lack of credibility, failure to maintain contact or provide support despite legal obligations, and general indifference. The court emphasized that the child was thriving in a prospective adoptive foster home, making termination in his best interest, and found clear and convincing evidence of abandonment and parental unfitness.

Termination of Parental RightsChild AbandonmentChild SupportParental UnfitnessBest Interest of ChildAppellate CourtJuvenile LawVisitation RightsDue ProcessCredibility Assessment
References
16
Case No. 01-03-00924-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2005

Mary Williams, D.D.S. and Russell Williams, D.D.S. v. L.M.S.C., Inc., D/B/A the Dental Solution

Mary Williams, D.D.S. and Russell Williams, D.D.S. appealed a judgment in favor of L.M.S.C., Inc., d/b/a The Dental Solution (TDS), stemming from a breach of contract dispute. TDS, a dental placement service, sued the Williams for an unpaid permanent placement fee after Diana Flanagan, whom TDS had previously placed temporarily as a dental hygienist, was hired by the Williams as a full-time dentist. The appellants challenged the jury's findings, arguing the contract did not cover dentists, lacked new consideration for modifications, and missed essential terms. The First District of Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the placement agreement, as modified by subsequent fee schedules, applied to the placement of dentists and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that the Williamses breached the contract by failing to pay the permanent placement fee. The court also upheld the award of attorney’s fees.

Breach of ContractPlacement AgreementDental IndustryPermanent Placement FeeContract ModificationConsiderationMeeting of the MindsLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceAttorney's FeesPrejudgment Interest
References
35
Case No. 14-14-00731-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 19, 2015

Joseph Pressil v. Jason A. Gibson, Jason A. Gibson, P.C. D/B/A the Gibson Law Firm, Clifford D. Peel, II, and Andrew C. Smith's

Plaintiff Joseph Pressil brought a legal malpractice action against Jason A. Gibson, Jason A. Gibson, P.C. d/b/a The Gibson Law Firm, Clifford D. Peel, II, and Andrew C. Smith (lawyers). Pressil claimed the lawyers were negligent in handling a lawsuit against a fertility clinic for inseminating his former girlfriend, Anetria Burnette, with his sperm without his knowledge or consent, leading to the birth of twins. The trial court granted the lawyers' motion for summary judgment on the professional negligence claim, finding that Pressil could not recover damages from the fertility clinic as a matter of law, nor did the clinic owe him a duty. The lawyers argue for the appellate court to affirm the summary judgment, contending that Pressil cannot legally claim damages for raising healthy children or for mental anguish related to 'dealing with' the children's mother, and that the fertility clinic owed no duty to Pressil, a non-patient sperm donor, under Texas law.

Legal MalpracticeSummary JudgmentAppellate ProcedureDamagesWrongful BirthWrongful PregnancyDuty of CareFertility ClinicSperm DonorConsent
References
69
Case No. 12-14-00256-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 27, 2015

Troy W. Simmons, D.D.S., P.C. and Troy W. Simmons, D.D.S. v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission

This case concerns an appeal by Troy W. Simmons, D.D.S., P.C., and Troy W. Simmons, D.D.S. (Simmons) against the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (THHSC). Simmons appealed the trial court's decision to grant THHSC's plea to the jurisdiction, which dismissed Simmons's suit for declaratory judgment. The dispute originated from a Medicaid fraud investigation by THHSC, leading to a payment hold and a final notice of overpayment against Simmons. Simmons's subsequent declaratory judgment suit, alleging ultra vires actions and constitutional violations, was dismissed on grounds of sovereign immunity. The appellate court affirmed, ruling that Simmons failed to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity by suing the state agency directly instead of an official, and that the Declaratory Judgment Act did not confer jurisdiction.

Sovereign ImmunityPlea to the JurisdictionDeclaratory Judgment ActUltra ViresMedicaid FraudAdministrative RemediesGovernmental ImmunityTexas LawAppellate ReviewSubject Matter Jurisdiction
References
18
Case No. 12-02-00099-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2003

Tommie J. Denson v. T.D.C.J.-I.D.

Inmate Tommie J. Denson filed a civil suit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Institutional Division (T.D.C.J.-I.D.), University of Texas Medical Branch (U.T.M.B.), and numerous employees for a hand injury sustained in prison. Denson alleged deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs, retaliation, and conspiracy under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983, as well as negligence and other claims under the Texas Tort Claims Act (TTCA) and medical malpractice under the MLIIA. The trial court initially granted summary judgments for the defendants and dismissed the medical malpractice claims due to an unqualified expert report. On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal of MLIIA claims and many summary judgments for the institutional defendants. However, the appellate court reversed and remanded several key claims against the individual employees and certain institutional claims, including those related to the negligent use of tangible property under TTCA and Section 1983 claims involving the Eighth Amendment, conspiracy, and retaliation.

Inmate RightsMedical MalpracticeDeliberate IndifferenceSummary JudgmentGovernmental ImmunityOfficial ImmunityQualified ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActCivil Rights ViolationRetaliation
References
73
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Princess C.

The case involves an appeal by a mother (respondent) from an Albany County Family Court order, which adjudicated her children to be permanently neglected and terminated her parental rights. The children, Princess C., Jyrese C., Lareisha D., Usavius D., and Autumn D., had been placed in the petitioner agency's custody due to the mother's failure to comply with conditions related to domestic violence, substance abuse, and unstable housing. The appellate court found that the petitioner agency exercised diligent efforts and that the mother failed to plan for the children's future. However, the court determined that the record was insufficient to conclude whether the termination of parental rights was in the best interest of each child. Consequently, the appellate court withheld its decision and remitted the matter back to the Family Court for a further dispositional hearing to be held within 90 days.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationChild WelfareFamily Law AppealDiligent EffortsBest Interest of ChildDomestic ViolenceSubstance AbuseMental HealthUnstable Housing
References
18
Case No. 03-94-00497-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 12, 1995

Lillian Minchey and D. C. Minchey v. Michael Defiel, D.D.S.

Appellants Lillian and D.C. Minchey appealed the trial court's dismissal of their dental malpractice suit against Dr. Michael Defiel for want of prosecution. The lawsuit, filed in 1989 for events dating back to 1973, saw minimal activity over 53 months due to the original attorney suspending it to pursue a worker's compensation claim and a subsequent delay after retaining new counsel. Dr. Defiel moved for dismissal in May 1994, which the court granted in June 1994. The appellate court reviewed the dismissal for abuse of discretion, considering factors like case activity, duration, and excuses for delay. Given the prolonged inactivity and the age of the underlying facts, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's order.

Dismissal for Want of ProsecutionAbuse of DiscretionDental MalpracticeAppellate ReviewTrial Court DiscretionCase ActivityLitigation DelayWorker's Compensation ClaimProcedural LawTexas Court of Appeals
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 6,451 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