Updated Daily

Case Law Database

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

Case No. ADJ317667

Regular

Jun 15, 2018

NANCY COBB vs. BIOSITE INCORPORATED, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to exclude defendant's expert biomechanical reports, finding discovery closed prior to their submission and defendant failed to demonstrate due diligence. The Board also denied defendant's request to disqualify the WCJ, as no specific facts establishing bias were presented. Removal was deemed an inappropriate remedy due to the lack of shown substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, the WCJ's evidentiary ruling and refusal to disqualify were upheld.

RemovalForensic Biomechanical ExpertExclusion of EvidenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery ClosureDue DiligenceWCJ DisqualificationBias AllegationWCAB Rule 10452Labor Code § 5502

References

Case No. 03-10-00673-CV

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 06, 2012

Texas Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Glenn Parker, Executive Director, and Texas Chiropractic Association v. Texas Medical Association, Texas Medical Board, and the State of Texas

This case concerns an appeal by the Texas Board of Chiropractic Examiners (TBCE) and the Texas Chiropractic Association (TCA) challenging a district court's judgment. The district court invalidated portions of TBCE's administrative rule defining the scope of chiropractic practice, specifically regarding manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), needle electromyography (needle EMG), and certain diagnostic activities. The Court of Appeals affirmed the invalidation of rules permitting needle EMG and MUA, finding them to be "incisive" and "surgical" procedures respectively, and thus exceeding the statutory scope of chiropractic. However, the appellate court reversed the invalidation of rules allowing chiropractors to make certain diagnoses concerning the biomechanical condition of the spine or musculoskeletal system and subluxation complex, concluding these were within the statutory scope. The case was remanded for further proceedings regarding alternative constitutional challenges.

Chiropractic regulationMedical scope of practiceAdministrative rulesStatutory interpretationNeedle EMGManipulation Under AnesthesiaChiropractic diagnosisTexas lawHealth professional licensingJudicial review

References

Showing 1-2 of 2 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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

NANCY COBB vs. BIOSITE INCORPORATED, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

RemovalForensic Biomechanical ExpertExclusion of EvidenceMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery ClosureDue DiligenceWCJ DisqualificationBias AllegationWCAB Rule 10452Labor Code § 5502

Texas Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Glenn Parker, Executive Director, and Texas Chiropractic Association v. Texas Medical Association, Texas Medical Board, and the State of Texas