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. M2007-01799-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 2008

In Re Estate of Lucille Ray Heirs of Howard Ray v. Magdalene Long and Joshua (Josh) Todd Crews

This case involves a will contest concerning the estate of Lucille Ray. The heirs of her predeceased son, Howard Ray, challenged her will, alleging it was procured through undue influence by her daughters, Magdalene Long and Joyce Hess, who were beneficiaries. After a jury trial, the jury found that the will was not a product of undue influence and was valid. The son's children appealed, arguing a presumption of undue influence due to a confidential relationship between Magdalene Long and Lucille Ray. The Court of Appeals affirmed the jury's verdict, concluding that material evidence supported the finding and that any presumption of undue influence was rebutted by clear and convincing evidence, including independent advice from the drafting attorney.

Will ContestUndue InfluenceTestamentary CapacityConfidential RelationshipJury VerdictAppellate ReviewMaterial EvidencePresumption of Undue InfluenceIndependent AdviceEstate Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Desiree X.

Karen X. left her child, Desiree X., with her live-in boyfriend, Demetrius AA., who was later found to have caused the child's vaginal injuries. Petitioner filed a child abuse petition, which Family Court dismissed on abuse grounds but sustained on neglect grounds, adjudicating Desiree X. a neglected child and placing her in petitioner's custody. Karen X. appealed the neglect finding against her. The appellate court found insufficient evidence to establish neglect by Karen X., reasoning she had no prior reason to distrust Demetrius AA. The court reversed the neglect finding against Karen X. and remitted the matter for further proceedings, but affirmed the order as modified, noting the unchallenged neglect finding against Demetrius AA. still stands.

Child NeglectChild AbuseFamily LawParental SupervisionVaginal InjuryMedical ExaminationPreponderance of EvidenceRemittalAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. M2003-01158-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 18, 2004

Tonya Patrice Ray v. William Martin Ray v. Stephen Eric Staggs

This case concerns an appeal by Stephen Eric Staggs (Mr. Moore), the natural father of minor twins, challenging a trial court's order on custody and visitation. He contested the visitation rights granted to the stepfather, William Martin Ray, the refusal to change the children's surname to Moore, and the reliance on a sealed psychological report. The Court of Appeals affirmed the stepfather's visitation, finding it in the children's best interests, and upheld the trial court's division of costs and denial of attorney's fees. However, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision regarding the children's surname, ordering it changed to 'Moore' to affirm their bond with their natural father, given his custody and the biological parents' current surnames. The court affirmed the requirement for the children to receive further psychological counseling due to emotional distress.

Custody DisputeChild VisitationSurname ChangeParental RightsStepparent VisitationPsychological EvaluationChild SupportBest Interests of the ChildFamily LawAppellate Review
References
29
Case No. 10-17-00325-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2018

CCI Gulf Coast Upstream, LLC v. Circle X Camp Cooley, LTD

This case concerns an appeal regarding the interpretation of a free-gas clause in two oil and gas leases. Appellant CCI Gulf Coast Upstream, LLC challenged a judgment favoring Appellee Circle X Camp Cooley, Ltd., arguing that Circle X lacked ownership, the clause was indefinite, and public health issues were ignored. The Tenth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding CCI's arguments on standing, capacity, contract indefiniteness, statute of frauds, and public safety unconvincing. The court upheld that Circle X was entitled to free gas under the leases.

Oil and GasLease InterpretationFree Gas ClauseContract DisputeSummary Judgment ReviewAppellate LawTexas Civil ProcedureReal Estate LawCorporate CapacityContract Enforceability
References
37
Case No. 06-10-00112-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 15, 2011

Kerri Sue Hass Culver v. Billy Ray Culver

The case involves an appeal by Kerri Sue Hass Culver (Appellant) against a protective order obtained by her husband, Billy Ray Culver (Appellee). Billy Ray sought the protective order alleging family violence and the likelihood of future family violence. The trial court granted the protective order, and Kerri appealed, raising nine points of error including insufficient evidence, refusal of discovery and continuance motions, ineffective assistance of counsel, application of the Brady rule, prosecutorial misconduct, denial of recusal motions, and failure to file findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order, finding sufficient evidence of family violence and rejecting all of Kerri's points of error. The court found that Kerri's actions, such as attempting to run Billy off the road with her car and throwing a telephone at him, constituted family violence. The court also clarified that the modified judgments issued by the trial court were within its plenary power and did not require additional hearings under Chapter 87 of the Texas Family Code.

Protective OrderFamily ViolenceDomestic AbuseAppellate ProcedureSufficiency of EvidenceJudicial DiscretionMotion for ContinuanceRecusalDue ProcessCivil Injunction
References
35
Case No. M2012-01227-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 25, 2013

William Michael Ray v. Southern Tennessee Medical Center, LLC

This medical malpractice action was appealed after a jury verdict favored the defendant doctor, Dr. Asher A. Turney, regarding his treatment of William Michael Ray for a myocardial infarction. The plaintiff, William Michael Ray, argued the trial court erred in allowing a medical expert witness, Dr. Andy Walker, to testify, citing issues with disclosure and the locality rule. The Court of Appeals found no abuse of discretion by the trial court in permitting Dr. Walker's testimony, determining he met the required "modicum of familiarity" with the medical community under the locality rule. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in the lower court's decisions.

medical malpracticeexpert witnesslocality ruleabuse of discretionstandard of careemergency medicinemyocardial infarctionappellate reviewevidence admissibilityprocedural error
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Shaun X.

The case concerns a father (respondent) who appealed a Family Court decision finding him to have abused and neglected his son, Shaun X., and issuing an order of protection prohibiting contact until the child's 18th birthday. The petitioner, a social services agency, initiated the proceedings in February 1994, following a history of prior allegations and a conviction for sexual misconduct involving a niece. The Family Court sustained the allegations based on testimony from the child's mother, a social worker, and a psychologist, all indicating sexual abuse. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's findings, rejecting the respondent's contentions regarding diligent efforts and the sufficiency of the evidence. The court also upheld the order of protection, deeming it reasonable given the risks, the child's wishes, and the respondent's past failure to comply with court-ordered counseling.

Child AbuseChild NeglectSexual AbuseOrder of ProtectionSupervised VisitationFamily Court ActSocial Services LawAppellate ReviewPreponderance of EvidenceOut-of-Court Statements
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Brentwood Pain & Rehabilitation Services, P.C. v. Allstate Insurance

This opinion addresses whether Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) procedures are subject to the same fee limitations as X-rays under New York's no-fault auto insurance law. Plaintiffs, a group of MRI service providers ("Providers"), argued that applying x-ray fee schedules to MRIs is improper and violates insurance contracts. Defendants, numerous insurance companies ("Insurers"), along with the New York State Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) and Department of Insurance (DOI), contended that the fee limitations for multiple diagnostic x-ray procedures (Ground Rule 3 of the WCB Fee Schedule) should also apply to MRIs. The court, deferring to the interpretations of the WCB and DOI, found their application of Ground Rule 3 to MRIs to be reasonable. Consequently, the court granted the Insurers' motion for summary judgment, denied the Providers' cross-motion for summary judgment, and denied the Providers' motion for class certification as moot.

MRIX-rayNo-Fault InsuranceFee ScheduleWorkers' Compensation BoardDepartment of InsuranceRegulatory InterpretationSummary JudgmentClass ActionDiagnostic Imaging
References
35
Case No. C.C.A. No. 01C01-9610-CC-00425
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 1997

State v. Ray Vance

The defendant, Ray Vance, appealed his conviction of aggravated sexual battery in Stewart County Circuit Court. He was serving a ten-year sentence for the conviction. Vance raised three issues on appeal: whether the court erred in disallowing corroborative testimony about the victim's sexual maturity, whether the court erred in instructing the jury on release eligibility dates, and whether the evidence sufficiently supported the jury's verdict. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no reversible error regarding the evidence exclusion, jury instructions, or sufficiency of the evidence. The court noted that the defendant failed to comply with the mandatory notice requirements of Rule 412 regarding sexual behavior evidence and found the jury instruction on sentencing to be harmless.

Aggravated Sexual BatteryChild Sexual AbuseHymenal TearsRule 412 EvidenceRelease EligibilitySufficiency of EvidenceJury InstructionsCompromise VerdictAppellate ReviewCriminal Law
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Rebecca X.

This case involves appeals from six Family Court orders that adjudicated Rebecca X., Carissa Y., and Brittany Y. as abused and/or neglected children. Brittany Y. accused the respondent (her mother's boyfriend) of sexual abuse, which was corroborated by medical examinations and social worker assessments despite attempts by her mother and the respondent to influence her statements. The Family Court found clear and convincing evidence of sexual abuse and derivative neglect for her sisters. The respondent was deemed a legally responsible person due to his cohabitation and disciplinary role. The appellate court affirmed all orders, concluding that Brittany's out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated, the respondent was properly identified as legally responsible, and the findings of derivative neglect were amply supported. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were also rejected.

Sexual abuseChild neglectCorroborated testimonyDerivative findingsParental dutyMedical evidenceWitness intimidationFamily Court proceedingsAppellant rightsAbuse adjudication
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 631 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