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. 03-06-00002-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 20, 2007

Texas Court Reporters Certification Board and Michele Henricks, as Director of the Court Reporters Certification Board v. Esquire Deposition Services, L.L.C.

The Texas Court Reporters Certification Board (Board) initiated disciplinary proceedings against Esquire Deposition Services, L.L.C. (Esquire) for alleged violations concerning long-term volume discount arrangements for court reporting services. Esquire subsequently filed suit against the Board and its director, Michele Henricks, challenging the Board's statutory authority to regulate or prohibit such discounts and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The district court denied the Board's plea to the jurisdiction, prompting an appeal. The Court of Appeals held that the Board possesses exclusive jurisdiction over disciplinary claims and determined that Esquire's claims, which broadly questioned the Board's general authority over long-term discounts, were not ripe for judicial review as they depended on contingent facts and agency expertise. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the district court's order, dismissing Esquire's suit due to lack of jurisdiction.

Administrative LawJurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionRipeness DoctrineExclusive JurisdictionStatutory InterpretationDeclaratory Judgment ActCourt Reporters Certification BoardCourt Reporting FirmsLong-term Volume Discounts
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 18, 1995

Miller v. Chater

Plaintiff initiated this action to seek review of the Secretary of Health and Human Services' decision establishing June 1, 1992, as the onset date for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits due to alleged disability from mental retardation. Magistrate Judge Carol E. Heckman issued a Report and Recommendation, advising denial of the Secretary's motion for judgment on the pleadings and remand for reconsideration. The Magistrate Judge found errors in the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) assessment of the plaintiff's functional limitations, particularly regarding social domain, and noted the ALJ's failure to consider the retroactivity inference from the Zebley class action stipulation. District Judge Arcara reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and with no objections filed, adopted its findings. Consequently, the defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings was denied, and the case was remanded to the Secretary for further reconsideration, emphasizing a misapplication of post-Zebley requirements for adjudicating children’s SSI benefits claims.

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)Disability BenefitsMental RetardationChild Disability ClaimsAdministrative ReviewSocial Security ActAge-appropriate functioningMedical EvidenceFunctional LimitationsOnset Date
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stafford v. Barnhart

Plaintiff Danny L. Stafford sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security Administration's decision denying his application for a closed period of disability insurance benefits, marking his second federal court appearance for this claim. The court previously remanded the case for reconsideration of new evidence. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Harry L. Williams, Jr., reconsidered and again denied the application. Plaintiff alleged legal errors by the Commissioner in evaluating medical opinions and substantial evidence errors in credibility determinations and the hypothetical question posed to the vocational expert. The court, led by District Judge Heartfield, adopted the Magistrate Judge's report, finding no legal error in the ALJ's evaluation of the treating physician's opinion and concluding any other errors were harmless. The court also determined that the ALJ's credibility findings and the hypothetical question were supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, the Commissioner's decision was affirmed, and the plaintiff's action was dismissed.

Disability benefitsSocial Security ActALJ decision reviewTreating physician opinionMedical evidenceResidual functional capacityVocational expert testimonySubstantial evidenceHarmless errorChronic pain
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Boyd v. Perales

The petitioner sought to expunge a 1976 child abuse report from the State Central Register, which alleged that her children were left bound and unsupervised, arguing it was irrelevant to her current child care employment. This challenge was initiated via a CPLR article 78 petition and transferred to the Appellate Division. An Administrative Law Judge had previously expunged two later reports but maintained the 1976 report. The court confirmed the respondents' determination, finding substantial evidence supported the ALJ's conclusion that the petitioner's serious lack of judgment in 1976 remained relevant to child care. Furthermore, the court dismissed the petitioner's due process argument as it was raised for the first time on appeal.

Child Abuse ReportState Central RegisterExpungementChild Care EmploymentAdministrative Law JudgeDue ProcessCPLR Article 78Social Services LawAppellate ReviewRehabilitation
References
1
Case No. 15-0129
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2014

Baltasar D. Cruz v. James Van Sickle, Karl-Thomas Musselman D/B/A Burnt Orange Report and Katherine Haenschen

This case involves a libel lawsuit filed by Baltasar D. Cruz against James Van Sickle, Karl-Thomas Musselman d/b/a Burnt Orange Report (BOR), and Katherine Haenschen. The lawsuit stemmed from a statement in an article posted on the BOR website by Van Sickle regarding Cruz, who was a judicial candidate. The trial court initially granted the defendants' motions to dismiss under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) and awarded attorney's fees to all defendants. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the lawsuit and the award of attorney's fees to James Van Sickle. However, the Court of Appeals reversed the award of attorney's fees to Karl-Thomas Musselman d/b/a Burnt Orange Report and Katherine Haenschen, ruling that as they were represented pro bono, they did not 'incur' attorney's fees as required by the TCPA.

LibelDefamationTexas Citizens Participation ActAnti-SLAPPPro Bono RepresentationAttorney's FeesJudicial CandidatePublic OfficialFreedom of SpeechStatutory Interpretation
References
83
Case No. ADJ8708677
Regular
Apr 26, 2016

MANUEL OSUNA vs. AMERIPRIDE SERVICES INC., CNA INSURANCE, ESIS

This case concerns Manuel Osuna's workers' compensation claim against Ameripride Services Inc. for a back injury sustained while pushing a heavy cart. The defendant petitioned for reconsideration, arguing the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by relying on a preliminary medical report and admitting the treating physician's report. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, adopting the ALJ's reasoning. The WCAB also dismissed the petition for removal as reconsideration is the proper remedy for challenging a final order. The ALJ's report detailed why the evidence supported a finding of industrial injury, distinguishing the applicant's specific incident from prior cases cited by the defendant.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalApplicantDefendantWCJPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorTreating PhysicianLabor Code Section 4628AOE/COE
References
5
Case No. ADJ6591842
Regular
Jan 28, 2013

FRANCISCO LUJAN vs. MAXON INDUSTRIES, INC., CHARTIS COSTA MESA, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

This case involves a worker's compensation claim by Francisco Lujan against Maxon Industries, Inc. The defendant, Maxon Industries, filed a Petition for Reconsideration arguing that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by relying on the medical opinions of Dr. Diane Weiss. The defendant contended Dr. Weiss's reports were not substantial evidence due to perceived discrepancies in symptom severity, lack of psychological testing, alleged ex parte communication, contradiction by another doctor, disregard of videotape evidence, and non-conformity with AMA Guides. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration, adopting the ALJ's report which found Dr. Weiss's opinions credible and well-reasoned, supported by the applicant's testimony and corroborated by another medical expert on the critical issue of work capacity. The WCAB also upheld the ALJ's reliance on the vocational expert's report, finding it unrebutted, and found no error in the award of attorney's fees.

Petition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical ExaminerElectric shockSub rosa videoGAF scorePsychological testingEx parte communicationAMA GuidesVocational expertUniform Reduction Method
References
1
Case No. ADJ8914954
Regular
Mar 26, 2015

JUAN CASTRO vs. CONTAINER SUPPLY CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration, upholding the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) findings. The ALJ's decision was based on the treating physician's detailed reports and the applicant's credible testimony regarding his persistent limp and use of a cane. The Board gave great weight to the ALJ's credibility determination, noting that a single physician's opinion can constitute substantial evidence. The employer had argued the ALJ erred by relying on the treating physician's opinion over the Panel QME's report.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility determinationsubstantial evidencemedical opinionsPanel QMEtreating physicianpermanent disabilityleft ankle injury
References
6
Case No. ADJ10145265
Regular
Jul 21, 2017

KUSUM NARAYAN vs. ESKATON PROPERTIES, INC.

This case involves a worker's compensation applicant seeking disqualification of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The applicant alleges the ALJ ignored the statute of limitations by allowing the defendant to accept some injuries while denying others after eleven years, and erroneously ordered the applicant to attend a QME exam with another patient's medical records. The ALJ's report details a history of discovery disputes and orders compelling attendance at medical evaluations, noting that no witnesses have been sworn. The Appeals Board adopted the ALJ's report, finding no grounds for disqualification and denying the applicant's petition.

Petition for DisqualificationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJPQMESupplemental PleadingRule 10848Nature and Extent of InjuryCompel AttendancePanel QMEStatute of Limitations
References
0
Case No. ADJ10255057
Regular
Nov 30, 2020

GREGG VIDEGAIN vs. NANCY MARKWELL dba MARKWELL FARMS, THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award because the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred by not fully developing the record regarding the applicant's temporary disability. There are significant gaps in medical reporting from the primary treating physician concerning the applicant's disability status. The Board rescinded the ALJ's decision and returned the matter for further proceedings to clarify these reporting gaps and a specific date of disability mentioned in a physician's report. The Board emphasized its duty to ensure substantial justice and further develop undeveloped matters.

Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust FundTemporary Disability IndemnityPrimary Treating PhysicianProgress ReportDevelopment of RecordExecutive Order N-68-20Permanent and Stationary DateMedical Treatment StipulationReconsideration PetitionAdjudication Number
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 6,274 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