Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. E2011-00831-COA-R3-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 30, 2012

Cristy Irene Fair v. Stephen Lynn Cochran

The case of Cristy Irene Fair v. Stephen Lynn Cochran involved an appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County. The Trial Court dismissed Fair's motor vehicle accident claim because proof of service for her summons was not returned to the clerk until 412 days after issuance, failing to comply promptly with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 4.03(1). Consequently, Fair could not rely on Tenn. R. Civ. P. 3 to toll the statute of limitations. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, emphasizing the necessity of strict compliance with procedural rules for service of process.

Statute of LimitationsService of ProcessMotion to DismissCivil Procedure RulesAppellate ReviewJudgment AffirmedTennessee LawMotor Vehicle AccidentProof of ServiceTimeliness

References

Case No. 03-04-00050-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 29, 2004

Al Boenker Insurance Agency, Inc. v. the Texas FAIR Plan Association The Texas Department of Insurance And Jose Montemayor, Commissioner of Insurance

Appellant Al Boenker Insurance Agency, Inc. appealed a summary judgment ruling in favor of the Texas FAIR Plan Association (FAIR Plan). Al Boenker had challenged a bulletin issued by FAIR Plan, which restricted fees insurance agencies could charge for homeowners insurance applications and allowed for termination of agencies violating the contract. Al Boenker argued that FAIR Plan violated the separation-of-powers doctrine and exceeded its statutory authority. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment, concluding that FAIR Plan is not a state agency subject to the Texas Administrative Procedure Act's rulemaking provisions and acted within its authority derived from the FAIR Plan Act and its Plan of Operation by contractually limiting agent compensation and establishing conditions for agent termination.

Administrative LawInsurance LawContract LawSummary JudgmentDeclaratory JudgmentInjunctionAgency AuthoritySeparation of PowersStatutory ConstructionTexas Court of Appeals

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Galveston County Fair & Rodeo v. Kauffman

Travis Kauffman entered his steer "Reebok" in The Galveston County Fair and Rodeo steer show. After winning a class, the steer was later disqualified due to allegations of "airing," an unethical fitting practice. Daniel S. Kauffman, Jr., Travis's father, sued the Fair alleging violations of the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA), breach of contract, negligence, and gross negligence. A jury found in favor of Kauffman on all claims, with recovery elected under the DTPA. The Fair appealed, challenging aspects of the jury charge, evidence sufficiency, damages, consumer status under DTPA, and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the judgment but modified it by deleting a $1,500 damage award related to negligence.

DTPA ViolationUnconscionable ActNegligenceBreach of ContractSteer DisqualificationAnimal Show EthicsConsumer ProtectionAppellate ReviewDamagesMental Anguish

References

Case No. ADJ8075448

Regular

Oct 10, 2017

ALEX ROBLES vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a trial judge's award in favor of applicant Alex Robles against Southern California Gas Company (SCGC). SCGC sought reconsideration, asserting that crucial testimony was omitted from the trial record. The WCAB ordered transcription of all trial testimony to ensure a full and fair adjudication of SCGC's petition. This action was necessary to allow the Board further study of the factual and legal issues involved.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAOE/COEGoing and Coming RuleMinutes of HearingSummary of EvidenceTrial TestimonyWCAB Rule 10740Transcript TranscriptionElectronic Adjudication Management System

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 27, 2018

Saint-Jean v. Emigrant Mortg. Co.

This case involves a lawsuit by eight Black property owners against Emigrant Mortgage Company and Emigrant Bank, alleging predatory "STAR NINA" loans that targeted minority communities. Plaintiffs claimed these loans were designed to strip home equity by imposing an onerous 18% interest rate upon late payment, a calculated plan given the borrowers' low credit scores and lack of sophistication. A jury found Emigrant liable for violating the Fair Housing Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and New York City Human Rights Law, awarding compensatory damages. Following the verdict, both parties filed post-trial motions. The court granted in part and denied in part both defendants' and plaintiffs' motions, notably finding the Saintils' waiver unenforceable due to public policy and ordering a new trial on damages for all plaintiffs, citing inconsistencies and lack of clarity in the original awards.

Predatory LendingSubprime MortgagesRacial DiscriminationFair Housing ActEqual Credit Opportunity ActNew York City Human Rights LawJury VerdictPost-Trial MotionsDamagesNew Trial

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 19, 2010

In re Allen Children

The Department of Social Services (DSS) moved to reopen a trial to admit a certificate of conviction from Town of Sandy Creek Justice Court against the respondent father, Mr. Allen, for endangering the welfare of a child. The original neglect petition against Mr. Allen had been dismissed. The court considered factors for reopening a trial, including the sufficiency of the offer of proof, potential prejudice, and whether the evidence would add to the record. The court denied the motion, finding that while the conduct in both proceedings was similar and Mr. Allen had a full and fair opportunity to litigate in the criminal action, the conviction for endangering the welfare of a child did not, by itself, prove actual or imminent physical, emotional, or mental impairment to the child, which is a required element for a finding of neglect under Family Court Act § 1012(f)(i)(B). Therefore, the certificate of conviction lacked collateral estoppel effect and would not provide new evidence or add anything to the record.

Reopening TrialCollateral EstoppelNeglect PetitionChild EndangermentCertificate of ConvictionSufficiency of EvidenceFamily Court JurisdictionParental Minimum Degree of CarePrejudiceOffer of Proof

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

People v. Burton

Ottaway Newspapers, Inc., publisher of the Times Herald Record, sought access to court files in a brutal murder and rape case involving an unnamed defendant. Access was initially denied by the County Court of Sullivan County, citing Civil Rights Law § 50-b and concerns about prejudicing the defendant's right to a fair trial. The Record appealed, arguing that § 50-b should not apply due to the victim's death and prior disclosure of identity, and that fair trial concerns were not adequately demonstrated. The appellate court reversed the County Court's order, finding that Civil Rights Law § 50-b does not extend to deceased victims whose identity has been disclosed. The court also determined that the justifications for sealing the records based on fair trial prejudice were insufficient under both First Amendment and common-law access standards, granting the Record's application for access to the documents in redacted form.

Public Access to RecordsFirst Amendment RightsFair Trial RightsSealing Court RecordsCivil Rights Law § 50-bFreedom of the PressPrejudicial PublicityCommon-Law Right of AccessRape Victim PrivacyAppellate Review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 08, 1999

Anderson v. Conwood Co.

The plaintiffs, Anderson and Hollingsworth, filed suit against defendant Conwood for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), alleging improper acquisition of their credit reports for litigation. A jury awarded each plaintiff $2,000,000 in compensatory damages and $3,500,000 in punitive damages. Conwood subsequently moved for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, or a remittitur of damages, arguing the verdict was excessive and driven by passion and prejudice. The court granted Conwood's motion for remittitur, reducing each plaintiff's compensatory award to $50,000 and entirely vacating the punitive damages award due to a lack of evidentiary foundation. The court denied Conwood's motions for a new trial and judgment as a matter of law.

Fair Credit Reporting ActFCRAPunitive DamagesCompensatory DamagesRemittiturJury VerdictExcessive DamagesDue ProcessSixth CircuitDistrict Court

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mark v. Security Insurance Co. of Hartford

Mark and Monica Bennett appealed a jury's verdict in favor of Security Insurance Company of Hartford (SIC). The Bennetts alleged SIC violated the Texas Insurance Code and breached its common-law duty of good faith and fair dealing by delaying the approval of Mark's spinal surgery after a work-related injury in March 1996. Following a trial, the jury found in favor of SIC. On appeal, the Bennetts contended the trial judge erred in the jury charge instructions. The appellate court reviewed the trial court's decision under an abuse of discretion standard, finding the instructions fairly encompassed the pleadings and evidence. Consequently, the court affirmed the trial court’s judgment for SIC.

Workers' CompensationInsurance Bad FaithJury InstructionsAbuse of DiscretionMedical Treatment DelaySpinal SurgeryTexas Insurance CodeDuty of Good FaithFair DealingAppellate Review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 07, 2007

Drake v. Woods

Paris Drake petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, challenging his New York state conviction for Assault in the First Degree and Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree. Drake argued that the trial court violated his due process right to a fair trial and his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation by refusing to recall a witness (Carl Fortner) and by not inspecting a witness's (Witness A) psychiatric records or allowing cross-examination on her mental health. The court first addressed procedural default, finding that state appellate courts did not clearly rely on procedural bars. On the merits, the court denied both grounds for relief, concluding that the trial court's evidentiary rulings were not erroneous and did not deprive Drake of a fundamentally fair trial or his confrontation rights, as the jury had sufficient information to assess witness credibility.

Habeas CorpusSixth AmendmentDue ProcessConfrontation ClauseEyewitness IdentificationPsychiatric RecordsCross-ExaminationProcedural DefaultEvidentiary RulingsAssault First Degree

References

105

Showing 1-10 of 15,261 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. E2011-00831-COA-R3-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Mar 30, 2012

Cristy Irene Fair v. Stephen Lynn Cochran

Statute of LimitationsService of ProcessMotion to DismissCivil Procedure RulesAppellate ReviewJudgment AffirmedTennessee LawMotor Vehicle AccidentProof of ServiceTimeliness

References

Case No. 03-04-00050-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 29, 2004

Al Boenker Insurance Agency, Inc. v. the Texas FAIR Plan Association The Texas Department of Insurance And Jose Montemayor, Commissioner of Insurance

Administrative LawInsurance LawContract LawSummary JudgmentDeclaratory JudgmentInjunctionAgency AuthoritySeparation of PowersStatutory ConstructionTexas Court of Appeals

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Galveston County Fair & Rodeo v. Kauffman

DTPA ViolationUnconscionable ActNegligenceBreach of ContractSteer DisqualificationAnimal Show EthicsConsumer ProtectionAppellate ReviewDamagesMental Anguish

References

Case No. ADJ8075448

Regular

Oct 10, 2017

ALEX ROBLES vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 27, 2018

Saint-Jean v. Emigrant Mortg. Co.

Predatory LendingSubprime MortgagesRacial DiscriminationFair Housing ActEqual Credit Opportunity ActNew York City Human Rights LawJury VerdictPost-Trial MotionsDamagesNew Trial

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 19, 2010

In re Allen Children

Reopening TrialCollateral EstoppelNeglect PetitionChild EndangermentCertificate of ConvictionSufficiency of EvidenceFamily Court JurisdictionParental Minimum Degree of CarePrejudiceOffer of Proof

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

People v. Burton

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Jan 08, 1999

Anderson v. Conwood Co.

Fair Credit Reporting ActFCRAPunitive DamagesCompensatory DamagesRemittiturJury VerdictExcessive DamagesDue ProcessSixth CircuitDistrict Court

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Mark v. Security Insurance Co. of Hartford

Workers' CompensationInsurance Bad FaithJury InstructionsAbuse of DiscretionMedical Treatment DelaySpinal SurgeryTexas Insurance CodeDuty of Good FaithFair DealingAppellate Review

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Aug 07, 2007

Drake v. Woods

Habeas CorpusSixth AmendmentDue ProcessConfrontation ClauseEyewitness IdentificationPsychiatric RecordsCross-ExaminationProcedural DefaultEvidentiary RulingsAssault First Degree

References

105

Showing 1-10 of 15,261 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.