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. 08-06-00058-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 22, 2007

in the Matter of Raul G. Sanchez, Twilah Sanchez v. State Office of Risk Management, a Self-Insured Governmental Entity

This is an appeal from a no-evidence summary judgment granted in favor of the State Office of Risk Management (SORM). Twilah Sanchez sought workers' compensation benefits after her husband, Raul Sanchez, died following a work-related single-car accident. SORM denied the claim, asserting Raul was intoxicated at the time of the accident based on blood alcohol tests taken hours after the incident. Sanchez presented expert testimony challenging the reliability of retrograde extrapolation, but her expert could not definitively state that Raul was not intoxicated. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that Sanchez failed to present sufficient evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact that her husband's blood alcohol content was less than 0.08 at the time of the accident.

Intoxication DefenseSummary JudgmentNo-evidence Summary JudgmentRetrograde ExtrapolationBlood Alcohol Content (BAC)Expert TestimonyBurden of ProofAppellate ReviewAutomobile AccidentDeath Benefits
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sanchez Ex Rel. Sanchez v. Huntsville Independent School District

Pedro Sanchez was expelled by the Huntsville Independent School District (HISD) for possessing firearms and drugs. His mother, Maria Ofelia Sanchez, appealed the expulsion, seeking a pure trial de novo review. The trial court dismissed her action after she declined to amend her pleadings, leading to this appeal. The appellate court addressed whether the appropriate standard of review for school expulsion appeals under Tex.Educ.Code Ann. § 21.3011(e) is a pure trial de novo or a substantial evidence de novo review. It affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the "substantial evidence de novo" standard is applicable and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case or denying a stay.

School ExpulsionDe Novo ReviewSubstantial EvidenceDue ProcessEducation LawTexasAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionInjunctive ReliefSchool Discipline
References
25
Case No. 11-24-00097-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 07, 2025

Jennifer Sanchez Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Veronica Sanchez and Edward Sanchez v. K&C Chicken 2 LLC., Individually and D/B/A Bush's Chicken and Bush's Chicken

This appeal arises from an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction in a wrongful death case concerning Veronica Sanchez, an employee of K&C Chicken, who was tragically killed by a coworker. The central legal question involved whether the Texas Department of Insurance—Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC) possessed exclusive jurisdiction to determine the compensability of her death under workers' compensation law. The Texas Supreme Court's ruling in University of Texas Rio Grande Valley v. Oteka (Oteka II) clarified this issue, stating that the DWC does not have exclusive jurisdiction when specific conditions are met. As these conditions were satisfied in the present case, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment.

Wrongful DeathPlea to the JurisdictionExclusive JurisdictionWorkers' CompensationAdministrative Remedies ExhaustionCourse and Scope of EmploymentAffirmative DefenseAppellate ReviewTexas Supreme Court PrecedentEmployee Injury
References
4
Case No. 06-06-00223-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 04, 2007

Alfonso Sanchez v. State

Alfonso Sanchez appealed his conviction for possession of a deadly weapon in a penal institution after a shank was found in his cell during a routine shakedown. The jury convicted him and assessed an eight-year confinement sentence, which was stacked on his prior sentence. Sanchez argued on appeal that the trial court erred by allowing the State to improperly impeach a defense witness's character and by questioning a witness concerning Sanchez's custodial silence. The Court of Appeals, Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana, affirmed the trial court's judgment. The appellate court found that Sanchez failed to preserve these alleged errors for review due to untimely and non-specific objections at trial.

Criminal LawAppellate ProcedurePreservation of ErrorImpeachment of WitnessCharacter EvidenceCustodial SilenceFelony ConvictionDeadly WeaponPenal InstitutionTexas Courts
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sanchez v. State Office of Risk Management

Raul Sanchez was paralyzed and later died following a single-car accident while returning from work training. His widow, Twilah Sanchez, filed a workers' compensation claim, which the State Office of Risk Management (SORM) denied, asserting Raul was intoxicated. SORM secured a no-evidence summary judgment, arguing Sanchez lacked proof to show Raul was not intoxicated. Sanchez appealed, presenting lay and expert testimony to challenge the intoxication finding and the reliability of SORM's expert. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding Sanchez failed to provide evidence demonstrating Raul's blood alcohol content was below the legal intoxication limit of 0.08.

Workers' CompensationIntoxication DefenseSummary JudgmentRetrograde ExtrapolationBlood Alcohol ContentExpert TestimonyLay Witness TestimonyAppellate ReviewTexas LawEmployment Accident
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sanchez v. Leggett

Benjamin G. Sanchez, an employee of L. H. Pruett d/b/a Pruett Lease Services, sustained serious injuries while performing work for Kenneth R. Leggett d/b/a Leggett Welding & Construction Company. National Surety Corporation, Pruett's workmen's compensation carrier, intervened, asserting a subrogation interest for benefits paid to Sanchez. Leggett defended by claiming Sanchez was a 'loaned servant.' The trial court granted summary judgment for Leggett. The appellate court found a material issue of fact regarding Sanchez's employment status, citing a verbal agreement between Pruett and Leggett that each would cover their own employees and insurance. The court also held that Leggett was estopped from denying the contract's existence after Pruett's insurer, National Surety Corporation, fulfilled its obligations. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded for trial on its merits.

Loaned ServantTemporary EmployeeSummary JudgmentWorkmen's CompensationSubrogationContract LawEstoppelRight of ControlMaterial Fact IssueOral Agreement
References
15
Case No. 14-03-00053-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 13, 2004

Nelda Sanchez v. Krogers, Inc.

In this slip-and-fall case, Nelda Sanchez appealed a no-evidence summary judgment granted in favor of Krogers, Inc. Sanchez had filed a premises liability action against Krogers for injuries sustained from a fall in one of their supermarkets. Krogers moved for summary judgment, arguing a lack of evidence that they had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition. The trial court granted this motion. Sanchez's appeal was based on the assertion that she had provided sufficient evidence to create a fact issue regarding Krogers's knowledge, and that the trial court erred in denying her post-judgment motion to reconsider. The appellate court found that Sanchez's summary judgment response failed to provide proper evidence and that new evidence in a post-judgment motion could not be considered on appeal. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

Slip and FallPremises LiabilitySummary JudgmentNo-Evidence MotionAppellate ReviewActual KnowledgeConstructive KnowledgeEvidence SufficiencyTrial Court ErrorPost-Judgment Motion
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sanchez v. Texas State Board of Medical Examiners

Dr. Armando Sanchez, a physician, appealed the district court's judgment affirming the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners' order revoking his medical license and imposing penalties. The disciplinary action was based on findings that Sanchez had solicited the murder of a former patient, M.G., who had previously threatened him following a workers' compensation dispute. Sanchez denied intending murder, claiming he sought to have the patient intimidated or deported by an off-duty police officer, to whom he paid $8,000. The administrative law judge found that Sanchez solicited M.G.'s murder, which constituted unprofessional conduct likely to injure the public. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, upholding the Board's findings and rejecting Sanchez's claims of evidentiary and procedural errors.

Medical License RevocationProfessional MisconductSolicitation of MurderWorkers' CompensationDue ProcessSubstantial EvidenceAdministrative LawBoard of Medical ExaminersPhysician DisciplineCriminal Conduct
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Johnson & Johnson Medical, Inc. v. Sanchez

Martha Sanchez, a material handler for Johnson & Johnson Medical, Inc., suffered an on-the-job injury in 1987 and was subsequently placed on an 'indefinite medical layoff.' Despite assurances of recall, she was never reinstated. Sanchez filed suit in 1991, alleging wrongful termination under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act (article 8307c) and later adding claims for fraud and breach of contract. The trial court's rulings led to an appeal, where the court of appeals reversed summary judgment on the 8307c claim and a judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the fraud claim. The Texas Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals' judgment regarding the 8307c claim, remanding it for further proceedings due to a factual dispute over when Sanchez received unequivocal notice of termination. However, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals' decision on the fraud claim, rendering judgment for Johnson & Johnson due to a lack of evidence of reliance on the part of Sanchez.

Wrongful terminationStatute of limitationsFraud claimWorkers' compensationMedical layoffUnequivocal noticeCause of action accrualSummary judgmentJudgment notwithstanding verdictReliance element
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sanchez v. Texas Employers Insurance Ass'n

Sanchez and TEIA (Texas Employers' Insurance Association) filed motions for rehearing concerning a claim for nursing services. Sanchez's claim stemmed from an injury on May 26, 1977. The jury found that nursing services were required but that TEIA did not fail to furnish them. The appellate court previously sustained Sanchez's argument that the jury's finding lacked evidential support. On rehearing, TEIA argued that the issue of failure to furnish was immaterial and that Sanchez waived the right to have the reasonable costs of nursing services determined. The court rejected TEIA's arguments, stating the immateriality objection was untimely and the waiver rule did not apply to properly conditionally submitted issues. Consequently, both motions for rehearing were overruled, and the original judgment remained unaltered.

RehearingWorkers' Compensation ActJury IssuesEvidential SupportWaiverConditional SubmissionCivil ProcedureTexas LawAppellate ReviewMedical Services Claim
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 238 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