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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

San Antonio Building & Construction Trades Council v. City of San Antonio

The San Antonio Building and Construction Trades Council (SABTC) and individual representatives challenged the City of San Antonio regarding prevailing wage requirements for construction workers on a convention center hotel project. SABTC argued that Chapter 2258 of the Texas Government Code mandated prevailing wages, but the trial court denied this, finding that despite being a 'public work', no 'public funds' were used for its construction. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment. It determined that public funds pledged as security for revenue bonds, or the bonds themselves, did not constitute public funds used for the 'construction' of the project under the relevant statute.

Prevailing Wage LawPublic WorksPublic FundsAssociational StandingLabor LawDeclaratory JudgmentTexas Government CodeRevenue BondsHotel Occupancy TaxStatutory Interpretation
References
16
Case No. 15-25-00093-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 19, 2025

State of Texas v. City of San Antonio, Ron Niremberg, in His Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of San Antonio, and Erik Walsh, in His Official Capacity as City Manager of the City of San Antonio

The State sued the City of San Antonio, its Mayor, and its City Manager for ultra vires conduct under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, seeking declarations that the City’s plan to spend taxpayer dollars on travel for out-of-state abortions violates the Texas Constitution’s Gift Clause. The district court granted the City’s plea to the jurisdiction, asserting the claim was not ripe, and dismissed the suit. The State argues that the City’s plan to fund out-of-state abortion travel violates the Gift Clause by lacking public benefit, failing to serve a public purpose, and not retaining public control over funds. The State contends that delaying judicial review would cause great hardship due to the imminent risk of constitutional injury from the disbursement of funds, which the City intended to expedite before SB 33's effective date or by the end of its fiscal year. The State asserts the case is ripe for review because the illegal activity is "likely to occur," and despite SB 33 prohibiting such funding, the City's belief it can disburse funds by September 30, 2025, keeps the controversy live.

Public Funds MisuseAbortion Travel FundingTexas Gift ClauseRipeness DoctrineUltra Vires ActConstitutional ChallengeState-City ConflictReproductive Rights PolicyTaxpayer MoneyInjunctive Relief
References
89
Case No. 04-11-00402-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2012

City of San Antonio, and Its Agent, San Antonio Water System v. Albert Kevin Martin, A/K/A Kevin Martin

Albert Kevin Martin filed a whistleblower action against his former employer, San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and the City of San Antonio, alleging constructive discharge after reporting asbestos pipe disposal concerns to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). A jury initially found in Martin's favor, but SAWS appealed, disputing the causal link between Martin's report and his constructive discharge, and challenging the compensatory damages award. The appellate court affirmed the jury's finding of causation, concluding that SAWS's adverse actions were linked to Martin's whistleblowing, despite SAWS's alternative explanations. However, the court determined there was legally insufficient evidence to support the jury's award for past and future compensatory damages, particularly regarding mental anguish and chest pains, as the evidence presented did not meet the required legal standards for establishing such damages. Consequently, the appellate judgment was "AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED," deleting all references to compensatory damages from the trial court's judgment.

WhistleblowerConstructive DischargeRetaliationAsbestosEnvironmental ComplaintTCEQCausationCompensatory DamagesMental AnguishLegal Sufficiency
References
19
Case No. 04-14-00451-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2014

Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc. v. City of Public Service Board of San Antonio, a Municipal Board of the City of San Antonio

Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc. appealed an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction on its attorney's fees claim in a breach of contract suit against the City of San Antonio acting through the City Public Service Board (CPS). The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, affirmed the trial court's decision. The court determined that Chapter 271 of the Texas Local Government Code, as applicable to the 2004 contract, did not waive governmental immunity for attorney's fees. Furthermore, the court rejected arguments that CPS waived immunity by seeking affirmative relief or engaging in a proprietary function. The appellate court concluded that the trial court properly granted the plea to the jurisdiction due to the absence of a clear and unambiguous waiver of immunity for attorney's fees.

Governmental ImmunityAttorney's FeesBreach of ContractPlea to JurisdictionTexas Local Government CodeChapter 271Waiver of ImmunityProprietary FunctionSubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate Review
References
20
Case No. 13-04-224-CV and 13-04-358-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 20, 2006

G. Xavier Montemayor and Franklin T. Graham, Jr. v. Jose Antonio Ortiz Fernandez, Jose Antonio Ortiz Celada, and Wife, Becky Ortiz

This case involves consolidated appeals concerning debt collection and alleged tortious conduct. Appellants, G. Xavier Montemayor and Franklin T. Graham, Jr., sought to satisfy a 1990 judgment debt against Jose Antonio Ortiz Fernandez and Jose Antonio Ortiz Celada by attempting to levy against Schor's, a business owned by Becky Ortiz. The trial court initially granted partial summary judgments determining the 1990 debt was contractual and Schor's was Ortiz's special community property, not subject to the debt. Ortiz also filed counterclaims for damages including abuse of process, malicious prosecution, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, for which a jury awarded her damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's summary judgments regarding the nature of the debt and the status of Schor's property. However, it reversed the judgment awarding damages to Ortiz, finding no evidence to support her counterclaims for tortious conduct, thus negating the basis for punitive and mental anguish damages.

Texas Court of AppealsConsolidated AppealsDeclaratory JudgmentEx Parte ReceivershipCommunity Property LawContractual DebtTort ClaimsAbuse of ProcessMalicious ProsecutionDefamation
References
76
Case No. ADJ3459373 (VNO 0543932)
Regular
May 04, 2009

Antonio Leyva vs. Emmons Roof Service, Barrett Business, Corvel Sacramento

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to reverse a previous award, finding applicant Antonio Leyva's injury did not arise out of and occur in the course of employment. The Board determined the "going and coming rule" applied, as Leyva's earlier start time for his roofing job was not an extraordinary circumstance constituting a "special mission." Therefore, the commute to the job site was not covered.

Going and coming ruleSpecial mission exceptionWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardAntonio LeyvaEmmons Roof ServiceBarrett Business ServicesCorvel SacramentoWCJ
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Leyva v. Ace American Insurance Co.

Margarita Leyva appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Ace American Insurance Company. Leyva, an employee injured at The Scott Fetzer Company, sued Ace American for alleged violations of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act and Insurance Code, citing statutory bad faith for failure to provide claim information, and sought a declaration regarding Ace American's subrogation interest. The trial court initially granted a take-nothing summary judgment against Leyva. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment concerning Leyva's statutory bad faith claim, concluding that no such cause of action exists under the cited codes for failure to provide subrogation information. However, the court reversed and remanded the portion of the judgment addressing Leyva's request for a declaration on the waiver of subrogation interest, as Ace American had not moved for summary judgment on that specific claim.

Workers' CompensationStatutory Bad FaithSummary JudgmentSubrogation InterestInsurance Code ViolationsTexas Labor CodeAppellate ReviewWaiverDeceptive Trade PracticesUnfair Settlement Practices
References
17
Case No. 04-00-00528-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 2001

Maria Reynosa and Antonio Reynosa, Individually and as Next Friends of David Reynosa v. the University of Texas Health Science Center

The appellants, Maria and Antonio Reynosa, individually and as next friends of David Reynosa, a minor, appealed the trial court's decision to grant a plea to jurisdiction and motion to dismiss filed by the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. The appellee contended that the suit was barred by governmental immunity. The underlying suit alleged negligence by several medical professionals during Maria Reynosa's childbirth. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the appellee did not waive its immunity against suit because the individuals alleged to be negligent did not meet the statutory definition of

Governmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActMedical MalpracticeNegligence AllegationsEmployee StatusSubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate AffirmationPlea to JurisdictionMotion to DismissTrial Court Ruling
References
10
Case No. 08-09-00166-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 2010

Margarita Leyva v. ACE American Insurance Company

Margarita Leyva appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Ace American Insurance Company. Leyva, injured on the job, sued Ace American for alleged statutory bad faith due to their failure to provide claim information under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act and Insurance Code. The trial court granted summary judgment, prompting Leyva’s appeal. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment concerning the statutory bad faith claim, finding no such cause of action in the relevant codes. However, it reversed and remanded the portion of the judgment relating to Leyva’s request for a declaration that Ace American had waived its subrogation interest, as this claim was not addressed in the summary judgment motion.

Workers' CompensationSummary JudgmentStatutory Bad FaithInsurance CodeSubrogation InterestAppellate ReviewTexas Labor CodeDeceptive PracticesUnfair Settlement PracticesDeclaratory Judgment
References
16
Case No. 14-06-00325-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2007

Daniel Antonio Aguirre v. Dora G. Vasquez

This case involves an appeal concerning a multi-vehicle collision during a dust storm that resulted in fatalities and injuries to employees and a passenger of Systems Painters, Inc. The injured parties and families of the deceased received workers' compensation benefits and subsequently sued multiple entities, including the estate of their own driver, Jose Ernesto Aguirre. The appellate court addressed the trial court's grant of summary judgment, specifically examining the application of the Workers' Compensation Act's exclusive remedy defense and claims of gross negligence and ordinary negligence. The court affirmed summary judgment on most claims but reversed and remanded the passenger/father's (Daniel Antonio Aguirre) negligence claim against Ernesto's estate for trial.

Workers' Compensation ActExclusive RemedyGross NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewCourse and Scope of EmploymentJudicial AdmissionQuasi-AdmissionNegligence ClaimWrongful Death
References
33
Showing 1-10 of 266 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