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. NO. 07-09-0348-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2010

Covenant Health System D/B/A Covenant Medical Center v. Dean Foods Company, a Certified Self-Insured

Covenant Health Systems, acting as an intervenor, appealed the trial court's decision to grant a plea to the jurisdiction filed by Dean Foods Company. Dean Foods contended that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Covenant failed to exhaust administrative remedies by not pursuing Medical Dispute Resolution with the Texas Workers Compensation Commission (TWCC) and not appealing a Contested Case Hearing Officer's Decision to the TWCC Appeals Panel. Additionally, Covenant filed an objection and motion to strike or correct the clerk's record, citing omitted requested documents and the inclusion of unrequested documents. The court directed Covenant to request omitted documents via a supplemental record but denied the motion to strike or correct, stating that document inclusion does not imply relevance.

Texas Appellate CourtAppellate ProcedureClerk's RecordPlea to the JurisdictionAdministrative RemediesWorkers' CompensationMotion to StrikeSupplemental RecordSubject Matter JurisdictionMedical Dispute Resolution
References
2
Case No. 07-09-0348-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 24, 2011

Covenant Health System D/B/A Covenant Medical Center v. Dean Foods Company, a Certified Self-Insured

Covenant Health System appealed the trial court's order dismissing its claims against Dean Foods Company for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Covenant had intervened in an injured employee's suit to recover medical expenses incurred for a work-related injury. Dean Foods had denied full payment, claiming the second knee operation was non-compensable. While administrative panels initially affirmed non-compensability, a jury later found the injury compensable. The appellate court reversed the dismissal, holding that Covenant, as a subclaimant, was not required to join the employee's appeals or undergo medical dispute resolution for the undisputed portion of medical bills. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Workers' CompensationMedical ExpensesSubject Matter JurisdictionAdministrative RemediesMedical Dispute ResolutionAppellate ReviewTexas Labor CodeJudicial ReviewSubclaimantCompensability
References
103
Case No. E2014-01399-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2015

Connie Raby v. Covenant Health

Connie Raby sued Covenant Health, Rentenbach Engineering Company, and TEG Architects, LLC, alleging negligence due to excessive radiation exposure from unshielded radiology facilities at Methodist Hospital. Defendants sought summary judgment based on the construction statute of repose, arguing the project was substantially complete by March 23, 2006, and the statute had expired. The Trial Court granted summary judgment, a decision which Connie Raby appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling that the facilities were substantially complete as intended, regardless of defects, and the statute of repose applied, thereby defeating Raby's claims. The appellate court also found no abuse of discretion in denying Raby's motion to add Methodist Medical Center as a party or in limiting discovery.

Construction NegligenceStatute of ReposeSummary JudgmentSubstantial CompletionRadiation ExposureAppellate ReviewTrial Court DiscretionMedical Facilities ConstructionTort LawDesign Defect
References
35
Case No. E2014-01409-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2015

Keith Gillis v. Covenant Health

Plaintiff Keith Gillis sued Covenant Health, Rentenbach Engineering Company, and TEG Architects, LLC, alleging construction negligence and damages from excessive radiation exposure due to omitted lead shielding in a hospital's radiology facilities. The Trial Court granted summary judgment for the defendants, citing the construction statute of repose and finding the project substantially complete by March 2006. On appeal, Plaintiff argued that the defect prevented substantial completion and sought to add Methodist Medical Center as a party. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that substantial completion occurred when the facility could be used for its intended purpose, despite defects, and that the statute of repose barred the claims. The court also found no abuse of discretion in denying the motion to amend or limiting discovery.

construction negligencestatute of reposesummary judgmentradiation exposurelead shieldingsubstantial completionappellate reviewabuse of discretionpleading requirementsfraud
References
33
Case No. E2014-01405-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2015

Michael Phillips v. Covenant Health

Plaintiff Michael Phillips sued Covenant Health, Rentenbach Engineering Company, and TEG Architects, LLC, alleging construction negligence and excessive radiation exposure due to missing lead shielding in radiology facilities. Defendants moved for summary judgment, citing the statute of repose, arguing the project was substantially completed in March 2006. The Trial Court granted summary judgment, finding the statute of repose applied and no exceptions for fraud were adequately pleaded, a decision the Court of Appeals affirmed. The appellate court held that substantial completion occurs when a project can be used for its intended purpose, even with defects, thus the statute of repose had expired before the lawsuit was filed in January 2014. Additionally, the Trial Court's denial of Plaintiff's motion to amend and its limitation of discovery were upheld, as they did not constitute an abuse of discretion.

Construction negligenceStatute of reposeSubstantial completionRadiation exposureSummary judgmentAppellate reviewAbuse of discretionDiscovery limitationsFraudulent concealmentDefective construction
References
29
Case No. 01-18-00145-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 27, 2018

IPFS Corporation v. Sue Ann Lopez

IPFS Corporation appealed the trial court’s denial of its motion to compel arbitration in a lawsuit filed by Sue Ann Lopez. Lopez, a former IPFS sales representative, sought a declaratory judgment regarding non-solicitation agreements after joining a competitor. IPFS argued that Lopez's claim fell within the broad scope of their arbitration agreement, which covered 'all legal claims arising out of or relating to employment' with specific, narrow exclusions. The court analyzed the arbitration agreement's language, emphasizing the policy favoring arbitration and noting that Lopez's declaratory judgment, despite not seeking monetary damages, did not fall under the temporary equitable relief exception. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's order, compelling arbitration and dismissing the case.

Arbitration AgreementMotion to CompelDeclaratory JudgmentNon-Solicitation AgreementEmployment DisputeContract InterpretationFederal Arbitration ActAppellate ReviewEquitable ReliefScope of Arbitration
References
19
Case No. 14-09-00475-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2010

State v. Carolyn Sue Krizan-Wilson

Carolyn Sue Krizan-Wilson was indicted for the 1985 murder of her husband. She sought dismissal due to a nearly 23-year prosecutorial delay, arguing due process violations, which the trial court granted. The State of Texas appealed, contending that the trial court erred in finding intentional delay for tactical advantage or bad faith. The appellate court, applying the Fifth Circuit and Texas two-prong test, acknowledged substantial prejudice but found no evidence of intentional delay for an improper purpose. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings, rejecting other grounds for dismissal such as effective assistance of counsel, right to testify, fair trial, and laches.

Pre-indictment DelayDue ProcessFifth AmendmentSixth AmendmentTexas ConstitutionRight to Fair TrialEffective Assistance of CounselLaches DoctrineMurder IndictmentAppellate Review
References
20
Case No. E2014-01408-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2015

Mary Ridenour v. Covenant Health

This appeal concerns a construction negligence case where Mary Ridenour and Jacob Ross Ridenour (Plaintiffs) sued Covenant Health, Rentenbach Engineering Company, and TEG Architects, LLC (Defendants) for damages from excessive radiation exposure. Plaintiffs alleged that the absence of lead shielding in radiology facilities at Methodist Hospital caused the exposure. The Circuit Court for Anderson County granted summary judgment to the Defendants, citing the construction statute of repose, Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-202, as a complete defense. The Trial Court found that the project was substantially complete by March 23, 2006, and the lawsuit, filed in January 2014, was outside the four-year statute of repose. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Trial Court's decision, holding that substantial completion is met when a project can be used for its intended purpose, regardless of defects, and that no exceptions to the statute of repose (such as fraud or wrongful concealment) were adequately pleaded. The Court also affirmed the denial of Plaintiffs' motion to amend to add Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge (MMC) as a party and the limitation of discovery.

Construction NegligenceStatute of ReposeSummary JudgmentSubstantial CompletionAppellate ReviewRadiation ExposureMedical Facility LiabilityFraudulent ConcealmentMotion to AmendDiscovery Abuse
References
30
Case No. PD-1485-10
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 14, 2011

State of Texas v. Wilson, Carolyn Sue Krizan

Carolyn Sue Krizan-Wilson was indicted for murder 23 years after her husband's death. She filed a motion to dismiss the indictment due to pre-indictment delay, which the trial court granted. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals reversed this dismissal. This Court granted her petition for discretionary review, arguing the delay caused substantial prejudice and was for an impermissible purpose. This Court affirmed the court of appeals, holding that while Krizan-Wilson suffered substantial prejudice, she failed to prove the delay was an intentional device for tactical advantage or other bad faith purposes. The case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Pre-indictment delayDue process violationFifth AmendmentTactical advantageBad faithSubstantial prejudiceStandard of reviewAbuse of discretionAppellate reviewCriminal procedure
References
21
Case No. M2015-02155-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 2016

Patricia Sue Kuhlo v. Ernest Charles Kuhlo

The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment in a divorce action between Patricia Sue Kuhlo and Ernest Charles Kuhlo. Husband appealed several rulings, including the denial of attorney assistance, valuation and division of a partnership interest, the sale of commercial real estate, and awards of transitional alimony and attorney's fees to the Wife. The appellate court found no error in the trial court's decisions, noting the Husband was not indigent and had opportunities to secure counsel. Furthermore, the court upheld the valuation of the partnership interest due to Husband's failure to provide documentation, and affirmed the transitional alimony and attorney's fees for the Wife given her financial need and contributions. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed on all grounds.

DivorceMarital Property DivisionAlimonyTransitional AlimonyAttorney's FeesAppellate ReviewDiscretion of Trial CourtPartnership Interest ValuationSpecial MasterFair Market Value
References
44
Showing 1-10 of 426 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