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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Milestone Operating, Inc. and Dstj, L.L.P. v. Exxonmobil Corporation

This case concerns whether defendants DSTJ, L.L.P. and Milestone Operating, Inc. satisfied the first element of the Craddock test to set aside a no-answer default judgment obtained by ExxonMobil Corporation. The Supreme Court reviewed the lower court's decision, which affirmed the trial court's denial of Milestone's motion for new trial. Milestone argued their failure to answer was not intentional or consciously indifferent, citing a lack of recall regarding service. The Court found Milestone's excuse sufficient to satisfy the first Craddock element, overturning the court of appeals' judgment and remanding for consideration of the remaining Craddock elements.

Default judgmentCraddock testConscious indifferenceMeritorious defenseNew trialService of processTexas lawAppealAppellate procedureContract dispute
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Old Republic Insurance Co. v. Scott

Old Republic appealed the denial of its motion for a new trial following a default judgment entered against it in favor of Lola Scott, an employee who filed a workers' compensation claim. Old Republic, the workers' compensation carrier for ARA Food Services, argued that its failure to file a timely answer was due to mistake or accident, not intentional or conscious indifference, satisfying the first prong of the Craddock test. The trial court and court of appeals had affirmed the denial, but the appellate court found that Old Republic's uncontroverted affidavits established the first Craddock element. Consequently, the court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and remanded the case for consideration of the remaining Craddock test elements.

Default JudgmentMotion for New TrialAbuse of DiscretionCraddock TestWorkers' Compensation ClaimConscious IndifferenceMistake or AccidentMeritorious DefenseAppellate ProcedureReversal
References
10
Case No. 11-03-00020-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2004

Leroy Phillip Mitchell v. Nations Credit Financial Services Corporation

Leroy Phillip Mitchell appealed a default judgment in favor of Nations Credit Financial Services Corporation, which granted possession of real property to Nations Credit after a foreclosure sale. Mitchell's appeal contested the trial court's refusal to grant his motion for new trial, arguing his failure to appear was not intentional and he had a meritorious defense. The appellate court applied the Craddock test, which requires demonstrating the failure to answer was unintentional, a meritorious defense exists, and a new trial would not cause delay. The court found Mitchell failed to explain why he didn't file an answer or request a continuance, thus not satisfying the first Craddock element. Furthermore, the court determined Mitchell's asserted equitable claim of ownership was not a defense against Nations Credit's right to possession, failing the second Craddock element. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Default judgmentForcible entry and detainerMotion for new trialCraddock testAbuse of discretionAppellate reviewRight to possessionReal propertyForeclosureTexas civil procedure
References
4
Case No. M2023-01034-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 17, 2024

Moye Jones v. Cathleen M. Craddock

This case involves an auto accident where Moye and Katherine Jones sued Cathleen Craddock and their uninsured motorist carrier, Erie Insurance Exchange. Erie sought to reduce its $50,000 uninsured motorist coverage by offsetting workers' compensation benefits it claimed were "payable" to Mr. Jones, despite evidence that he had received all authorized workers' compensation care and his case was closed. The trial court granted summary judgment to Erie. However, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for further proceedings, finding that genuine issues of material fact remained regarding whether Mr. Jones was entitled to additional workers' compensation benefits and if his actions constituted a voluntary waiver, distinguishing the case from precedents where claimants entirely failed to pursue workers' compensation benefits.

Auto AccidentUninsured Motorist CoverageWorkers' Compensation OffsetSummary JudgmentVoluntary Waiver of BenefitsInsurance Policy InterpretationAppellate ReviewGenuine Issues of Material FactPayable BenefitsEntitlement to Benefits
References
20
Case No. No. 10-08-00306-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2009

Donna Robinson v. Elliott Electric Supply

Donna Robinson was sued by Elliott Electric Supply on a guaranty agreement, leading to a default judgment against her. Robinson's subsequent motion for a new trial was overruled by operation of law. On appeal, Robinson argued that service was deficient or she met the Craddock test elements for a new trial. The appellate court found that Robinson satisfied all three elements of the Craddock test, demonstrating that her failure to appear was not intentional, she presented a meritorious defense, and granting a new trial would not cause undue delay or injury. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial.

Default JudgmentMotion for New TrialCraddock TestService of ProcessGuaranty AgreementAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewTexas Civil ProcedureRemandConscious Indifference
References
15
Case No. 14-19-00718-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 30, 2021

Krystal Hunter v. Candelario Ramirez and Joseph Monteleone

Krystal Hunter appealed a final summary judgment in her motor-vehicle-accident case against Candelario Ramirez and Joseph Monteleone. The trial court had granted summary judgment because Hunter failed to respond to the defendants' no-evidence motion, an oversight Hunter attributed to her attorney's notice emails landing in a spam folder. Hunter argued the trial court erred by not granting her motion for new trial, contending she satisfied the three Craddock elements due to a lack of actual notice. The appellate court found that Hunter met all Craddock elements, demonstrating that her failure to respond was unintentional, she presented a meritorious claim, and a new trial would not cause undue delay or injury. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Summary JudgmentMotion for New TrialCraddock ElementsDefault Judgment RuleNegligence ClaimMotor Vehicle AccidentAppellate ProcedureAbuse of DiscretionTrial Court ErrorConstructive Notice
References
14
Case No. 11-01-00250-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2002

Tanknology/NDE Corporation v. Robin Bowyer

The trial court awarded appellee, Robin Bowyer, a default judgment against appellant, Tanknology/NDE Corporation, for $239,640.47 for past medical expenses, pain, and impairment following a motor vehicle accident. Tanknology/NDE Corporation appealed, arguing that its failure to file an answer was not intentional but due to accident or mistake, that it had a meritorious defense, and that granting a new trial would not delay or injure Bowyer, thereby satisfying the three elements of the Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines test. The appellate court found that Tanknology/NDE Corporation had met all three Craddock elements, concluding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the motion for a new trial. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision and remanded the cause for a new trial.

default judgmentCraddock testmotion for new trialabuse of discretionequitable reliefconscious indifferencemeritorious defenseappellate reviewnegligence claimmotor vehicle collision
References
13
Case No. 2-09-361-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2010

Qi Nan Weng v. Denton Highway Haltom Associates, Ltd.

Appellant Qi Nan Weng appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for a new trial following a default judgment. Weng argued that he met the three Craddock elements for setting aside a default judgment: his failure to appear was not intentional, he had a meritorious defense, and granting a new trial would not cause delay or injury to the plaintiff. The appellate court focused on the third Craddock element, noting that Weng failed to address in his motion for new trial or supporting affidavits whether the appellee, Denton Highway Haltom Associates, Ltd., would be injured or delayed by a new trial. The court reiterated that the burden only shifts to the plaintiff to prove injury *after* the movant alleges no injury. Consequently, because Weng did not meet this burden, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order.

Default JudgmentMotion for New TrialCraddock ElementsAbuse of DiscretionLease AgreementSubleaseAppellate ProcedureTexas Court of AppealsCivil ProcedureContract Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Co. v. Drewery Construction Co.

Drewery Construction Company, Inc. obtained a default judgment against Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company on a surety bond. Fidelity's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court and affirmed by the court of appeals. On appeal, Fidelity raised three points for reversal: a minor omission in the citation, service of an original petition instead of an amended one, and the failure to establish the first Craddock element regarding the default being accidental or due to mistake. The Supreme Court found the first two points unpersuasive but agreed with Fidelity's third argument. The Court held that Fidelity's detailed affidavits, explaining the loss of service papers through their registered agent's system breakdown, were sufficient to establish that the default was not intentional or due to conscious indifference, thereby satisfying the first Craddock element. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Default JudgmentSurety BondMotion for New TrialService of ProcessCitation DefectsCraddock ElementsAccident or MistakeAppellate ReviewTexas Civil ProcedureDue Process
References
24
Case No. 2015-01-0177
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 03, 2016

Craddock, Deatrice v. Dialysis Clinic, Inc.

Deatrice Craddock, an employee of Dialysis Clinic, Inc. (DCI), filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking medical and temporary disability benefits for a left arm and shoulder injury allegedly sustained on May 8, 2015, due to an incident with a coworker, Karen Burgess. The central legal issue was whether Ms. Craddock provided sufficient medical expert opinion to establish that her alleged injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment. The Court found that Ms. Craddock failed to provide medical expert opinion expressly relating her alleged injury to the incident. Consequently, the Court denied her request for medical and temporary disability benefits, concluding she was not likely to prevail on the merits.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityWork InjuryCausationMedical Expert OpinionLeft Arm InjuryShoulder InjuryEmployment Scope
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 479 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