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. 22-0585
Regular Panel Decision
May 17, 2024

Texas Department of Transportation v. Mark Self and Birgit Self

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) was sued by Mark and Birgit Self for negligence and inverse condemnation after a subcontractor cut down trees on the Selfs' property outside the State's right-of-way easement. The Supreme Court of Texas reversed the court of appeals' judgment on both counts. The Court held that the Tort Claims Act does not waive immunity for the Selfs' negligence claim because the subcontractor's employees were not in TxDOT's paid service, nor did TxDOT employees directly operate the equipment. However, the Court found a viable cause of action for inverse condemnation, concluding that TxDOT intentionally directed the destruction of the trees for public use, even if it mistakenly believed it had the legal right to do so. The negligence claim was dismissed, and the inverse condemnation claim was remanded for further proceedings.

Sovereign ImmunityInverse CondemnationNegligence ClaimTort Claims ActGovernment LiabilityProperty DamageRight-of-Way EasementSubcontractor LiabilityTree RemovalEminent Domain
References
65
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 07909 [155 AD3d 1208]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 09, 2017

NYAHSA Services, Inc., Self-Insurance Trust v. People Care Inc.

Plaintiff, a self-insured trust, commenced a collection action against defendant, a former member, for unpaid assessments related to workers' compensation claims. Defendant counterclaimed and filed a third-party action against Cool Insuring Agency, the trust's administrators, alleging mismanagement. During discovery, a dispute arose over a report commissioned by defendant's counsel from a consultant, which Cool and plaintiff sought to compel. Defendant asserted attorney-client privilege, attorney work product, and material prepared in anticipation of litigation. The Supreme Court partially granted the motions to compel, a decision largely affirmed by the Appellate Division, Third Department, with a modification regarding a specific email exchange found to be protected attorney work product.

Discovery DisputeAttorney-Client PrivilegeAttorney Work ProductMaterial Prepared for LitigationSelf-Insurance TrustWorkers' Compensation BenefitsBreach of ContractUnjust EnrichmentThird-Party ActionClaims Administration
References
20
Case No. 12-20-00082-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2021

Sean Self v. West Cedar Creek Municipal Utility District

Sean Self appealed a take-nothing judgment granted to West Cedar Creek Municipal Utility District, dismissing Self’s suit for damages from sewage flooding his home. Self alleged negligent use of motor-driven equipment, premises defect, unconstitutional taking, non-negligent nuisance, and breach of contract. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that Self failed to establish a waiver of governmental immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act for the motor-driven equipment claim, as the damages arose from a broken plastic coupler, not the motor-driven pump. The court also found no evidence to support the premises liability, takings, non-negligent nuisance, or breach of contract claims, thus the District retained immunity.

Governmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActPlea to JurisdictionMotor-Driven EquipmentPremises DefectInverse CondemnationBreach of ContractNon-negligent NuisanceSewage FloodMunicipal Utility District
References
36
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gilberto Rincones v. Whm Custom Services, Inc.

Gilberto Rincones appealed a take-nothing judgment after being declared ineligible to work due to a disputed positive drug test. He sued his employer WHM Custom Services, Inc., Exxon Mobil Corporation, and DISA, Inc., alleging discrimination, retaliation, defamation, and negligence. The appellate court reversed summary judgments against WHM on claims of discrimination, retaliation, and compelled self-defamation. It also reversed summary judgments against Exxon and DISA for tortious interference with contract and negligence, remanding these claims for further proceedings. Summary judgments for Exxon on discrimination, retaliation, and defamation, and for DISA on breach of contract and defamation were affirmed, while finding jurisdictional basis for pattern or practice discrimination claims against WHM and Exxon.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationDefamationCompelled Self-DefamationNegligenceTortious InterferenceDrug Testing PolicySubstance AbuseSummary Judgment AppealDisparate Treatment
References
83
Case No. 03-22-00241-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 31, 2023

Texas Political Subdivisions Joint Self-Insurance Fund v. Texas Department of Insurance - Division of Workers' Compensation and Commissioner Cassie Brown in Her Official Capacity

The Texas Political Subdivisions Joint Self-Insurance Fund (TPS Fund) appealed the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction and summary-judgment motion by the 455th District Court of Travis County. The TPS Fund, a self-insured governmental entity, was assessed administrative penalties totaling $132,500 by the Texas Department of Insurance–Division of Workers’ Compensation for violations of the Texas Labor Code related to nonpayment or late payment of workers’ compensation benefits. The TPS Fund asserted governmental immunity from these penalties. The Court of Appeals reviewed the legislative history and prior common law, including Texas Workers’ Comp. Comm’n v. City of Eagle Pass, to determine if immunity was waived. It concluded that the 2019 amendment to Labor Code Section 504.053(e) merely codified existing law, which had already established a clear waiver of immunity for such regulatory actions against self-insured political subdivisions. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s order, holding that the TPS Fund’s governmental immunity is waived for the administrative penalties.

Workers' CompensationGovernmental ImmunityAdministrative PenaltiesTexas Labor CodeSelf-InsurancePolitical SubdivisionsStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewRegulatory AuthoritySovereign Immunity
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Amateur Athletic Union of the United States, Inc., Paul Campbell, Rod Seaford, and Charles Oliver v. Augustus Bray

Augustus Bray, a long-time volunteer and officer for the AAU, filed a lawsuit against the AAU and three individual officers (Paul Campbell, Rod Seaford, Charles Oliver) following an incident at an AAU-sponsored track meet where he was accused of sexual misconduct and subsequently arrested. Bray alleged negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, aiding and abetting, and conspiracy. The defendants moved to compel arbitration based on a binding arbitration provision in the AAU National Policies, but the trial court denied their motion. The appellate court reviewed the trial court's decision, concluding that the arbitration agreement was valid and enforceable against Bray and that his claims fell within its scope. However, the court found the agreement's prohibition against punitive damages to be unconscionable and severed that provision. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order and remanded the case with instructions to compel arbitration.

Arbitration AgreementFederal Arbitration ActTexas Contract LawAgency LawUnconscionabilityIllusory ContractPunitive DamagesSeverability ClauseVolunteer Sports OrganizationSexual Misconduct Allegation
References
36
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 08737
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 20, 2018

NYAHSA Servs., Inc., Self-Insurance Trust v. Recco Home Care Servs., Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court in Albany County. Plaintiff NYAHSA Services, Inc., Self-Insurance Trust, a self-insured trust providing workers' compensation coverage, sued defendant Recco Home Care Services, Inc. for unpaid adjustments after the defendant terminated its membership. Following an amendment to the complaint adding individual trustees as plaintiffs, the defendant asserted counterclaims for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence against these trustees, which the Supreme Court dismissed as time-barred. The defendant also sought to amend its answer to include a counterclaim under General Business Law, which was denied. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found that the Supreme Court erred in dismissing the counterclaims for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty and in denying the cross-motion to amend for the General Business Law claim. Consequently, the Appellate Division modified the Supreme Court's order, reversing parts of the dismissal and denial, and affirmed the order as modified.

Workers' Compensation CoverageSelf-Insurance TrustFraud AllegationsBreach of Fiduciary DutyGeneral Business LawStatute of LimitationsAmended PleadingsCounterclaimsAppellate ReviewMotion to Dismiss
References
2
Case No. 08-04-00259-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 03, 2005

in Re: Dillard Department Stores, Inc. and Grizelda Reeder

This is an original proceeding in mandamus where Dillard Department Stores, Inc. and Grizelda Reeder (Relators) sought to compel arbitration of a defamation claim filed by their former employee, Andrea Martinez. Dillard's argued that Ms. Martinez's defamation claim fell within the scope of a 2000 arbitration agreement. The trial court denied Dillard's motion to compel arbitration, finding the defamation claim was not covered. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the defamation claim did not fall under "personal injuries arising from a termination" or "violations of common law affecting economic terms of employment" as defined in the 2000 Rules of Arbitration. Therefore, the writ of mandamus was denied.

ArbitrationDefamationEmployment LawMandamusContract InterpretationScope of Arbitration AgreementJudicial AdmissionPersonal InjuryTexas Court of AppealsFederal Arbitration Act
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re Dillard Department Stores, Inc.

Relators Dillard Department Stores, Inc. and Grizelda Reeder sought mandamus relief to compel arbitration of a defamation claim brought by former employee Andrea Martinez, who alleged she was defamed after her termination due to false accusations of theft. Martinez disputed the applicability and validity of Dillard's arbitration agreements, arguing the consideration was illusory and her claim fell outside their scope. The trial court denied Dillard's motion to compel arbitration. On review, the appellate court found a valid arbitration agreement existed from 2000, rejecting Martinez's judicial admission argument. However, the court affirmed the trial court's denial, concluding that the defamation claim did not fall within the scope of the 2000 Rules of Arbitration, as 'personal injuries arising from a termination' was interpreted narrowly as bodily injury, and the claim did not concern 'economic terms of employment.' The petition for writ of mandamus was therefore denied.

Arbitration AgreementDefamationEmployment TerminationMandamus ReliefScope of ArbitrationIllusory ContractJudicial AdmissionPersonal Injury InterpretationFederal Arbitration ActTexas Law
References
19
Case No. 08-15-00079-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2016

County of El Paso, Self-Insured v. Mary Orozco

Ruben Orozco, an El Paso County deputy sheriff, tragically died in a car accident while returning home from an extra-duty security assignment. His wife, Mary Orozco, sought death benefits from the self-insured County, which denied the claim, arguing Ruben was not in the course and scope of his employment. Initially, a hearing officer found the injury compensable, but the Appeals Panel reversed this, concluding Ruben was merely commuting. The trial court sided with Mary, granting her motion for summary judgment. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Ruben was not actively engaged in law enforcement duties at the moment of the accident, thus not acting within the course and scope of his employment.

Workers' CompensationScope of EmploymentAutomobile AccidentDeputy SheriffExtra-Duty AssignmentCommuting RuleDual-Purpose TravelSummary JudgmentDeath BenefitsTexas Law
References
22
Showing 1-10 of 3,347 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