CompFox AI Summary
Sabrina Gallagher, an appellant, sued McClure Bintliff, The Hamlets Corporation, Bay Brazos Corporation, Lamar Water Supply Corporation, and Mesa Construction, Inc. in Travis County, Texas, to collect an earlier judgment. The original judgment, affirmed previously, was for $413,781.48, obtained in November 1983, against Sea Gun Sports Inn, Inc., where Gallagher suffered an on-the-job injury in February 1982. Sea Gun's workers' compensation insurance had lapsed, leading to the initial tort and breach of contract suit. In the current proceeding, Gallagher sought to hold the appellees liable for the Sea Gun judgment under an alter-ego theory. The district court granted the appellees' motion for summary judgment, which this Court affirmed on the grounds that Gallagher's claim was barred by limitations. The Court determined that the suit, though styled as a collection action, was fundamentally an attempt to impose liability for the underlying tort or breach of contract, and thus the two-year or four-year statute of limitations, respectively, applied from the date of injury (February 1982), not the date of judgment.
Gallagher v. Bintliff is a workers' compensation case decided in Court of Appeals of Texas. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Court of Appeals of Texas.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Sabrina Gallagher, an appellant, sued McClure Bintliff, The Hamlets Corporation, Bay Brazos Corporation, Lamar Water Supply Corporation, and Mesa Construction, Inc. in Travis County, Texas, to collect an earlier judgment. The original judgment, affirmed previously, was for $413,781.48, obtained in November 1983, against Sea Gun Sports Inn, Inc., where Gallagher suffered an on-the-job injury in February 1982. Sea Gun's workers' compensation insurance had lapsed, leading to the initial tort and breach of contract suit. In the current proceeding, Gallagher sought to hold the appellees liable for the Sea Gun judgment under an alter-ego theory. The district court granted the appellees' motion for summary judgment, which this Court affirmed on the grounds that Gallagher's claim was barred by limitations. The Court determined that the suit, though styled as a collection action, was fundamentally an attempt to impose liability for the underlying tort or breach of contract, and thus the two-year or four-year statute of limitations, respectively, applied from the date of injury (February 1982), not the date of judgment.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.