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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wilen v. Falkenstein

This case concerns an appeal from a trespass suit filed by William Falkenstein against his neighbor, John C. Wilen. Wilen had directed a tree service to trim a tree on Falkenstein's property without permission while Falkenstein was on vacation, resulting in a jury verdict for Falkenstein. The jury awarded actual damages, exemplary damages for malice, and attorney's fees. On appeal, the court reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence for trespass and damages, upholding the jury's findings of trespass, actual damages, and malicious conduct supporting exemplary damages. However, the appellate court modified the judgment by vacating the award of attorney's fees, ruling that such fees are not recoverable in a tort action like trespass under Texas law unless expressly authorized by contract or statute. The trial court's judgment was affirmed as modified.

TrespassProperty RightsNeighbor DisputeTree DamageIntentional TortActual DamagesExemplary DamagesMaliceAttorney's FeesAppellate Review
References
58
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Z.A.O., Inc. v. Yarbrough Drive Center Joint Venture

Yarbrough Drive Center Joint Venture (Yarbrough) sued Z.A.O., Inc. (ZAO) for breach of contract, nuisance, and trespass after ZAO, a former tenant operating a gas station, failed to remove hazardous substances from the leased property in El Paso, Texas upon lease termination. Despite ZAO's efforts and a state commission letter indicating no further corrective action was necessary for ZAO, the trial court found ZAO liable for trespass and nuisance. On appeal, the court affirmed the breach of contract claim, finding sufficient evidence that the lease required ZAO to remove all toxic substances. However, the appellate court reversed the findings of malice, nuisance, and trespass due to insufficient evidence, particularly noting that the state commission's determination of no further action superseded common law trespass claims. Consequently, the awards for past and future rental losses were reversed, but those for repair costs and soil testing were affirmed. Attorney's fees were reversed and remanded for segregation, as recovery is limited to the breach of contract claim.

Breach of ContractNuisanceTrespassEnvironmental ContaminationHazardous WasteLease AgreementDamagesAttorney's FeesLegal SufficiencyFactual Sufficiency
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Farrell v. Stram

Plaintiffs and defendants, neighboring lakefront property owners in Broome County, engaged in construction work near Oquaga Lake. Plaintiffs accused defendants of negligence, trespass, and nuisance, claiming their activities increased lake turbidity. A jury ruled in favor of defendants on the negligence claim, and the Supreme Court dismissed the trespass and nuisance claims. Plaintiffs appealed, but the appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding no compelling evidence to overturn the jury's negligence verdict and upholding the dismissal of trespass and nuisance due to a lack of intent.

Lakefront property disputeconstruction workenvironmental impactlake turbiditynegligence claimtrespass claimnuisance claimjury verdictappeal decisionevidentiary review
References
8
Case No. 04-14-00905-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 15, 2015

Escondido Resources II, LLC v. Justapor Ranch, L.C.

This appeal brief concerns an oil-and-gas lease dispute between Escondido Resources II, LLC (Appellant) and Justapor Ranch Company, L.C. (Appellee). Escondido challenges a trial court's summary judgment that declared its mineral lease terminated as of March 2, 2012, and ruled it a bad-faith trespasser. The trial court awarded Justapor over $12 million in trespass damages, denying Escondido any reimbursement for its $33 million in improvements. Escondido argues that the lease termination provision was ambiguous and inequitable, and that it was not a bad-faith trespasser. The brief requests reversal of the trial court's judgment and a ruling that the lease did not terminate.

Oil and gas leaseRoyalty disputeLease terminationSummary judgment appealBad-faith trespassEquitable reliefContract interpretationTexas lawMineral rightsLeasehold interests
References
14
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 03092 [238 AD3d 1088]
Regular Panel Decision
May 21, 2025

Shimunov v. Ashirov

The plaintiffs initiated an action against the defendants, their neighbors, to recover damages for property injury stemming from renovation work on the defendants' property. The allegations included redirected storm water causing flooding and the construction of an encroaching stone wall. The complaint sought damages under theories of negligence, nuisance, and trespass, along with permanent injunctive relief. The Supreme Court, Queens County, denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment to dismiss the negligence and trespass claims. The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that there were triable issues of fact regarding whether the property owners controlled their contractors' work for negligence liability and whether they directed the trespass.

Independent Contractor LiabilityNegligenceTrespassProperty DamageSummary Judgment MotionAppellate ReviewNondelegable DutyEmployer-Employee RelationshipAdjoining LandownersConstruction Work
References
19
Case No. 570244/13
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 14, 2016

People v. Sylvester (Sean)

This case involves consolidated criminal prosecutions where defendant Sean Sylvester appealed from two judgments of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County, rendered March 6, 2013, convicting him of disorderly conduct and trespass. The Appellate Term, First Department, affirmed the judgments of conviction. The court found that the accusatory instruments were not jurisdictionally defective, sufficiently alleging that the defendant had no legitimate purpose in a store, refused to leave when asked by workers, and began fighting, thereby establishing reasonable cause for disorderly conduct and trespass. The public dimension of the disorderly conduct was inferable from the commercial establishment setting, and the "remains unlawfully" element of trespass was established by allegations that the defendant defied a lawful order to leave.

Criminal LawDisorderly ConductTrespassAppellate ReviewJurisdictional DefectAccusatory InstrumentSufficiency of EvidencePublic DisorderUnlawful EntryCriminal Procedure
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Katakam

The defendant, a former computer consultant, was indicted on multiple computer crime charges for copying proprietary script files from Goldman Sachs before joining J.P. Morgan. The court considered motions to dismiss the indictment, evaluating the sufficiency of evidence for unlawful duplication of computer-related material, criminal possession, and computer trespass under Penal Law article 156. While finding insufficient evidence for computer trespass and one count of unlawful duplication due to the lack of unauthorized access or intent to commit trespass, the court upheld charges for unlawful duplication (based on economic value) and criminal possession. The judge denied the motion to dismiss in furtherance of justice, emphasizing the societal need to deter computer crime despite the defendant's personal consequences.

computer crimeunlawful duplicationcriminal possessioncomputer trespassindictmentPenal LawGrand Juryproprietary softwareGoldman SachsJ.P. Morgan
References
0
Case No. 2-04-315-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 06, 2006

John C. Wilen v. William Falkenstein

This appeal arises from a trespass suit initiated by William Falkenstein against his neighbor, John C. Wilen, for directing a tree service to trim a tree on Falkenstein’s property without consent. The trial court awarded Falkenstein actual damages, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees. On appeal, Wilen challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for trespass, damages, and the attorney’s fees award. The appellate court found sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings of trespass, actual damages, and exemplary damages, including a finding of malice. However, the court determined that attorney’s fees were not recoverable in this tort action, leading to a modification of the judgment to delete the attorney’s fees award, and affirming the trial court’s judgment as modified.

TrespassProperty RightsExemplary DamagesActual DamagesAttorney's FeesAppellate ReviewMaliceIntentional TortTree TrimmingProperty Dispute
References
62
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Burgher v. AF III Properties, LLC

Plaintiffs, who operate an automotive repair shop adjacent to defendant's shopping center, commenced an action alleging that defendant's property improvements (repaving a driveway and repairing a roof) diverted surface water onto their property, causing damage and interfering with their right-of-way. They also claimed trespass. Plaintiffs sought money damages, an alteration of defendant's drainage system, and a declaration of a perpetual prescriptive easement. The Supreme Court granted a prescriptive easement but otherwise denied summary judgment on the water diversion and trespass claims due to unresolved factual issues. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, finding that questions of fact existed regarding whether artificial means were used to divert water and whether defendant directed workers to trespass on plaintiffs' property.

Property disputeRight-of-wayPrescriptive easementSurface water diversionTrespassSummary judgmentAppellate reviewReal propertyLand useDrainage
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy Trust

This case addresses whether subsurface hydraulic fracturing of a natural gas well that extends into another's property constitutes a trespass for which the value of gas drained may be recovered. The Court held that the rule of capture bars such damages, emphasizing that the gas, once lawfully produced, does not belong to the adjacent landowner. Mineral lessors with a reversionary interest were found to have standing to sue for subsurface trespass causing actual injury. The Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment and remanded for a new trial due to the trial court's erroneous admission of an internal memo containing a racial slur, which was found to unfairly prejudice Coastal and lead to excessive jury awards. The Court rendered judgment that Salinas take nothing on claims for trespass and breach of the implied covenant to protect against drainage, while remanding other claims for a new trial.

Hydraulic FracturingRule of CaptureSubsurface TrespassOil and Gas LawMineral RightsImplied CovenantsBad-Faith PoolingDamagesPunitive DamagesEvidentiary Error
References
80
Showing 1-10 of 139 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