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. 2-03-152-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2005

Jacqueline C. Head, Individually and as Successor Trustee Under the FTW Living Trust v. U.S. Inspect DFW, Inc. F/K/A Affordable Inspections, Inc. and John Fox

Jacqueline Head appealed a summary judgment in favor of U.S. Inspect DFW, Inc. and John Fox. Head argued that her DTPA claims were wrongly barred by a professional services exemption, and a limitation of liability clause should not apply to her breach of contract and negligence claims. The Court affirmed the summary judgment regarding Head's DTPA claims for misrepresentation, failure to disclose, and unconscionability, along with her negligence and breach of contract claims. However, the Court reversed the summary judgment concerning Head's claim for breach of express warranty under the DTPA and the award of attorneys' fees, remanding these specific issues to the trial court for further proceedings.

Real Estate InspectionSummary JudgmentDeceptive Trade Practices ActProfessional Services ExemptionLimitation of LiabilityBreach of ContractNegligenceExpress WarrantyUnconscionabilityAttorneys' Fees
References
52
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Head v. U.S. Inspect DFW, Inc.

Jacqueline Head contracted with Affordable Inspections for a home inspection. She alleged that an unsupervised apprentice performed the inspection, failing to disclose significant water damage and structural defects. Head sued Affordable and John Fox (the inspector) under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) for misrepresentation, failure to disclose, unconscionability, and breach of express warranty, as well as for breach of contract and negligence. The trial court granted summary judgment for Affordable and Fox, applying the professional services exemption to DTPA claims and limiting liability for contract and negligence claims. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment on DTPA claims for misrepresentation, failure to disclose, and unconscionability, and upheld the limitation of liability for breach of contract and negligence. However, the court reversed and remanded the summary judgment on Head's DTPA claim for breach of express warranty, finding a fact issue regarding the promise of a licensed inspector performing the inspection. Consequently, the award of attorneys' fees to Affordable and Fox was also reversed and remanded.

Deceptive Trade Practices ActProfessional Services ExemptionBreach of ContractNegligenceLimitation of LiabilityExpress WarrantySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewReal Estate InspectionHome Inspector
References
50
Case No. 13-09-00128-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2011

Petroleum Solutions, Inc. v. Bill Head D/B/A Bill Head Enterprises and Titeflex Corporation

The case involves an appeal by Petroleum Solutions, Inc. (PSI) against Bill Head d/b/a Bill Head Enterprises (Head) and Titeflex, Inc., regarding a jury verdict stemming from a significant diesel fuel leak at Head's truck stop. PSI challenged trial court sanctions for spoliation of evidence, and findings related to Head's claims of breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and breach of contract, as well as Titeflex's indemnification claims. The appellate court affirmed the jury's verdict in favor of Head and Titeflex, finding sufficient evidence for PSI's breach of duties and product liability. However, the court reversed and remanded for a recalculation of prejudgment interest.

Diesel leakUnderground storage tankEnvironmental regulationsSpoliation of evidenceFiduciary dutyBreach of contractFraudIndemnificationProduct liabilityAttorney's fees
References
153
Case No. 01-15-01015-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 01, 2015

Allied Collision Center Inc. v. Ewemade Ozigbo

This document is a civil docketing statement filed with the First Court of Appeals, Houston, Texas. It outlines an appeal filed by Allied Collision Center, Inc. against Ewemade Ozigbo. The original judgment, signed on September 1, 2015, resulted from a bench trial involving breach of contract and DTPA claims, with actual damages of $2634.23 and punitive damages of $5268.42 awarded. The statement includes details about the attorneys for both parties, the perfection of the appeal, financial aspects of the case, and options for pro bono representation and alternative dispute resolution.

Appellate ProcedureDocketing StatementCivil AppealBreach of ContractDTPATexas Court of AppealsJudgment AppealNotice of AppealAttorney RepresentationPro Bono Program
References
0
Case No. 11-07-00268-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 26, 2009

Allstar Refinishing & Collision Center, Inc. v. Paula Rosas

Paula Rosas sued Allstar Refinishing & Collision Center, Inc. for conversion after Allstar failed to return her vehicle following repairs despite her payment. Allstar claimed a right to retain the vehicle under a statutory possessory lien, arguing she owed for a rental car. The trial court granted summary judgment for Rosas. On appeal, the Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the lien under Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 70.001 applies only to repair costs, not rental expenses. The court also noted Rosas had the right to direct her payment and Allstar failed to provide evidence for its mitigation of damages defense.

ConversionPossessory LienStatutory InterpretationSummary JudgmentDebtor's Right to Direct PaymentMitigation of DamagesVehicle Repair DisputeAppellate ReviewTexas Property CodeCivil Procedure
References
13
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 05983
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 06, 2018

Matter of Taylor v. Little Angels Head Start

Claimant, Laverne Taylor, sought workers' compensation benefits for a bilateral knee condition, alleging it was work-related due to changes in her job duties at Little Angels Head Start. She filed her claim over a year after leaving employment, and the employer controverted it due to lack of timely notice under Workers' Compensation Law § 18. Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded benefits, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed the decision, denying the claim. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the employer lacked actual knowledge of a work-related injury and was prejudiced by the delay, as Taylor did not inform them of the work-related nature of her condition until much later.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsTimely NoticeWorkers' Compensation Law § 18Causally-Related InjuryAppellate ReviewBoard DiscretionEmployer KnowledgePrejudiceBilateral Knee ConditionMedical Leave
References
3
Case No. 01-09-00730-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 20, 2011

Robert D. Lyall, Individually and Lyall Brothers Collision Center v. Ermenegildo Bermudez

Ermenegildo Bermudez sued Robert D. Lyall and Lyall Brothers Collision Center for violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA) and other causes, including conversion and violations of the Texas Property Code, after his truck was repossessed over alleged storage fees. The trial court ruled in favor of Bermudez, awarding treble damages for wrongful repossession and unconscionable conduct. Lyall appealed, challenging the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence for the treble damages award. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support that Lyall engaged in knowing, unconscionable conduct by repossessing Bermudez's truck without proper notice, using it for personal purposes, and failing to follow legal procedures for disposing of the vehicle.

DTPADeceptive Trade PracticesConsumer ProtectionWrongful RepossessionStorage FeesMechanic's LienTexas Property CodeTreble DamagesUnconscionable ConductLegal Sufficiency
References
12
Case No. CV 93-1443 ADS
Regular Panel Decision
May 15, 2000

LI HEAD START CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERV. v. Kearse

This case addresses cross-motions for reconsideration regarding a prior court order compelling defendants to return $497,736 to L.I. Head Start. The defendants' motion, citing concerns about the financial stability of the Community Action Agencies Insurance Group (CAAIG) Fund if the transfer occurred, was denied, as the court found their evidence outdated and irrelevant to the appropriate assessment date of withdrawal in 1992. Conversely, the plaintiffs' motion for prejudgment interest on the owed sum was granted, with the court ordering the defendants to pay the principal amount plus interest accrued from September 1, 1992. Additionally, the court awarded attorneys' fees to the plaintiffs, finding evidence of bad faith on the part of the defendants and noting the deterrent effect such an award would have on other fund trustees. However, the plaintiffs' request for computer legal research costs was denied as not being a separately taxable expense.

ERISAPension PlanHealth Benefit FundMotion for ReconsiderationPrejudgment InterestAttorneys' FeesFund DepletionFinancial StabilityBad FaithFederal Rules of Civil Procedure
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Moglia v. Sullivan County Head Start, Inc.

This memorandum decision addresses the defendants' motion for summary judgment concerning whether Sullivan County Head Start, Inc. acted "under color of law" in discharging the plaintiff, a key issue for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court referenced prior decisions, specifically Morse v. North Coast Opportunities, Inc. and Nail v. Community Action Agency of Calhoun County, which established that despite extensive federal funding and regulation, Head Start personnel decisions are not made under color of law. This is because federal and state officials lack sufficient control over personnel actions, and Head Start programs do not perform traditionally exclusive governmental functions. Consequently, the court found that Sullivan County Head Start is not a governmental entity for constitutional litigation purposes, granting the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissing the plaintiff's pendant State law claims without prejudice.

Summary JudgmentColor of Law42 U.S.C. § 1983Head Start ProgramGovernmental EntityPersonnel DecisionsState ActionFederal FundingDismissal Without PrejudiceBivens Claim
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Maryland Insurance Co. v. Head Industrial Coatings & Services, Inc.

This is an appeal in a bad faith insurance case involving Head Industrial Coatings and Services, Inc. (Head) and Maryland Insurance Company (Maryland). Head sued Maryland for denying a contractual liability claim, which was missing from its policy due to an agent's clerical error. The appellate court upheld the cause of action for bad faith, ruling that the agent's knowledge was imputable to Maryland, making the conduct knowingly wrongful. However, the court reduced Head's damage award to policy limits and reversed a statutory penalty. The case also involves a third-party action by Maryland against Gans & Smith Insurance Agency, which was remanded for a new trial due to issues with the jury's finding on breach of fiduciary duty.

Bad Faith InsuranceInsurance Code ViolationsContractual LiabilityAgent ErrorClerical ErrorIndemnity AgreementUnfair Claims Settlement PracticesDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingImputed KnowledgeDamages Calculation
References
59
Showing 1-10 of 750 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