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. 03-09-00666-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 30, 2011

Zurich American Insurance Company v. Chantal McVey as Beneficiary of Troy McVey

After her husband Troy McVey was killed in a motor vehicle accident while driving to Houston for a job-related training conference, Chantal McVey, as Troy's beneficiary, sought workers' compensation survivor benefits from Troy's employer's insurance carrier, Zurich American Insurance Company. Zurich denied coverage, asserting that Troy's death was not compensable because he had not been acting within the course and scope of his employment. The Division of Workers' Compensation found Troy's death compensable, a decision Zurich sought judicial review of in district court. The district court granted McVey's motion for summary judgment and denied Zurich's. On appeal, Zurich asserts the district court erred in its legal determination that Troy had been acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of his accident, but the court affirmed the district court's judgment.

Workers' CompensationCourse and Scope of EmploymentComing and Going RuleEmployer-Provided TransportationSpecial MissionCompensable InjurySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewMotor Vehicle AccidentTravel Expense
References
15
Case No. 07-23-00326-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2024

Old Republic Insurance Company v. Sherri Evans, Beneficiary of Michael S. Evans

Michael S. Evans, an Xcel Energy safety consultant, tragically died in a motorcycle accident while returning home to retrieve his company laptop. His beneficiary, Sherri Evans, filed a claim for death and burial benefits under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act against Old Republic Insurance Company (ORIC). The administrative law judge initially denied benefits, but the DWC Appeals Panel reversed this, finding the injury compensable. A jury trial affirmed this, leading the trial court to award benefits. ORIC appealed, arguing Michael was not in the course and scope of his employment. The Court of Appeals agreed with ORIC, reversing the trial court's judgment and rendering that the injury was not compensable, applying the 'coming and going' rule and rejecting the 'special mission' exception.

Workers' CompensationCompensable InjuryCourse and Scope of EmploymentComing and Going RuleSpecial Mission ExceptionFatal AccidentMotorcycle PolicyAppellate ReviewLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceEmployer Policy Violation
References
7
Case No. 06-02-00011-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 10, 2002

Betty Manasco, as Workers' Compensation Beneficiary of the Estate of Jack Manasco v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania

Betty Manasco, as the workers' compensation beneficiary of Jack Manasco's estate, appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of the Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania. The case concerned whether a head injury sustained by Jack Manasco in the course of his employment caused his subsequent malignant brain tumor, which led to his death. Manasco contested the trial court's decision to exclude the testimony of her expert witness, Dr. Richard Hamer, a neurologist, and the subsequent granting of summary judgment. The appellate court reviewed the exclusion of expert testimony under an abuse of discretion standard, considering the reliability of scientific evidence and the Zülch/Manuelidis criteria for causation. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the medical literature did not establish a causal link through epidemiological or other studies, thereby deeming the exclusion of Dr. Hamer's testimony within the zone of reasonableness.

Workers' CompensationCausationExpert WitnessSummary JudgmentBrain TumorHead InjuryMedical EvidenceEpidemiologyReliability of EvidenceAbuse of Discretion
References
10
Case No. 04-14-00685-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2015

American Casualty Co. of Reading, Penn. v. Denise Bushman as Beneficiary of Clayton F. Bushman, Jr.

This is an unopposed motion filed by Appellee Denise Bushman, as beneficiary of Clayton F. Bushman, Jr., Deceased, requesting a 30-day extension to file her Appellee's Brief. The current deadline is January 14, 2015, and the requested extended deadline is February 13, 2015. The motion cites counsel's heavy workload, involvement in other judicial and administrative proceedings, family commitments, and the need for adequate time to review the record and law. Appellant's counsel is unopposed to the motion.

Appellate ProcedureMotion to ExtendBrief FilingTexasWorkers' CompensationUnopposed MotionDeadline ExtensionLegal PleadingGuadalupe CountyFourth Court of Appeals
References
3
Case No. 03-10-00034-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2011

State Office of Risk Management v. Erika M. Cole, as Sole Beneficiary of the Estate of Carolyn P. Cole

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed a no-evidence summary judgment granted to Erika M. Cole, beneficiary of Carolyn P. Cole's estate. SORM challenged determinations by the Department of Insurance--Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC) regarding Carolyn's impairment rating, maximum medical improvement date, and disability status. Erika argued SORM lacked evidence to contradict DWC's findings, which relied on a 'designated doctor's' report. The appellate court found SORM presented sufficient medical evidence, including reports from Dr. Gordon and Dr. Cochran, to create a genuine issue of material fact. Consequently, the trial court's summary judgment and attorney's fees award were reversed and the case remanded.

Impairment Rating DisputeMaximum Medical Improvement DateSupplemental Income Benefits EligibilityMedical Opinion ConflictDesignated Doctor PresumptionNo-Evidence Summary JudgmentJudicial Review of Agency DecisionCervical Spine InjuryPre-existing Medical ConditionWorkers' Compensation Appeals
References
7
Case No. 07-07-0288-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 28, 2009

State Office of Risk Management v. Rachel Leigh Herrera, Victoria Danielle Herrera, Matthew Ryen Herrera, Kelcey Mercedes Dena Herrera, Care'n Destiny Herrera, Beneficiaries of Jose Arturo Herrera, And Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed the trial court's dismissal of its lawsuit seeking judicial review of an appeals panel decision, which found SORM responsible for paying death benefits to the beneficiaries of deceased police officer Jose Herrera. Officer Herrera died in the line of duty, and SORM denied liability, arguing he was employed by the City of Friona, a self-insured entity, not the State. The trial court dismissed SORM's suit because SORM failed to timely name the City of Friona as a defendant within the statutory 40-day period. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, ruling that the City of Friona was an indispensable party and the 40-day limitations period was not tolled for misidentification of parties. The court also upheld the award of attorney's fees to certain Herrera defendants, deeming SORM's claims against them to be without foundation.

Workers' CompensationJudicial ReviewInsurance Carrier LiabilitySubject Matter JurisdictionIndispensable PartyAttorney's FeesStatutory BeneficiariesMisidentification of PartiesAppellate Court DecisionTexas Labor Law
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York Underwriters Insurance Co. v. Ehlinger

This case concerns an appeal by New York Underwriters, a worker's compensation insurer, challenging an Industrial Accident Board (IAB) award of death benefits to the statutory beneficiaries of the deceased worker, Clarence G. Ehlinger. The insurer initially filed an appeal in district court, mistakenly naming the deceased worker as the sole defendant. After the statutory 20-day appeal period expired, an amended petition was filed correctly identifying the beneficiaries as defendants. The trial court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, a decision upheld by this court. The court ruled that the original petition naming the deceased was a nullity and did not confer jurisdiction over the beneficiaries, and the subsequent untimely amendment failed to cure this jurisdictional defect. The beneficiaries were thus entitled to stand on the IAB award.

Workers' CompensationJurisdictionTimeliness of AppealIndustrial Accident BoardStatutory BeneficiariesMistaken IdentityParty MisnomerTexas LawAppellate ProcedureDeath Benefits
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. of Wisconsin v. Konvicka

Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Wisconsin, the insurer of A. O. Smith Corporation, sued to set aside an award granted by the Texas Industrial Accident Board to the legal beneficiaries of John Konvicka. Konvicka, an employee, died from injuries sustained after attempting to start a stalled car in the employer's parking lot and then on a public highway following a heavy rain. The insurance company argued that the injury occurred outside the scope of employment since it was off-premises and after working hours. The court, however, determined that the injury was compensable under the Texas Workmen’s Compensation Act, emphasizing that the incident originated on the employer's premises and was incident to employment, aligning with the liberal construction of the statute. Consequently, the court denied the insurer's attempt to set aside the award and affirmed the beneficiaries' entitlement to compensation.

Workers' CompensationCourse of EmploymentScope of EmploymentOff-Premises InjuryCommuting HazardParking Lot InjuryTexas LawLiberal ConstructionAccidentFatal Injury
References
15
Case No. 07-07-0288-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 28, 2009

Otis Noble v. State

In this workers' compensation case, the State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed the dismissal of its suit for judicial review of an appeals panel decision. The dispute centered on who was liable for death benefits to the beneficiaries of officer Jose Herrera, SORM or the City of Friona, a self-insured entity. SORM failed to timely sue the City of Friona, instead naming the Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool (TML Risk Pool). The trial court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding the City an indispensable party not timely joined. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, distinguishing SORM's misidentification argument from precedent. The court also upheld the award of attorney's fees to certain Herrera beneficiaries, determining SORM's claims against them were without foundation.

Workers' CompensationJudicial ReviewSubject Matter JurisdictionIndispensable PartyLimitations PeriodMisidentificationAttorney's FeesFrivolous ClaimsDeath BenefitsInsurance Carrier Liability
References
20
Case No. 13-17-00641-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2018

American Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the Lisa Marie Buckley Trust and Co-Trustee of the John Buckley Jr. Trust and Kelly Rose Kinard Trust, John Buckley Jr. Trust, Lisa Marie Buckley Trust, Kelly Rose Kinard Trust, Together With John Buckley Jr., Lisa Marie Buckley, and Kelly Kinard, as Trustee, Co-Trustee and/or Trust Beneficiaries of the John Buckley Jr. Trust, Lisa Marie Buckley Trust and Kelly Rose Kinard Trust, and/or Shareholders v. Moorehead Oil & Gas, Inc., Moorehead Acquisition, LLC, and Moorehead Oil & Gas, LLC

This is an appeal regarding a summary judgment in a proceeding to determine the fair value of ownership interests in corporate stock under the Texas Business Organizations Code. Appellants, consisting of American Bank, N.A. as trustee, and the Buckley family members (John J. Buckley Jr., Lisa Marie Buckley, and Kelly Rose Kinard) as co-trustees and/or beneficiaries of their trusts, challenged the denial of their petition for stock valuation against Moorehead Oil & Gas entities. The key arguments on appeal were whether the Bank was the sole entity capable of requesting a valuation and if the limitations period was tolled due to the misnomer doctrine. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of Lisa Marie Buckley's claim as a beneficiary due to lack of standing, but reversed the remainder of the judgment, ruling that the first amended petition related back to the timely-filed original petition for limitations purposes and that American Bank, John J. Buckley Jr., and Kelly Rose Kinard had standing as trustees or co-trustees. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

Summary JudgmentCorporate Stock ValuationDissenting Shareholder RightsTexas Business Organizations CodeTrusts and TrusteesBeneficiary StandingLimitations PeriodMisnomer DoctrineAppellate ProcedureFair Value Appraisal
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 339 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