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

Baylor University Medical Center v. Biggs

This case involves an interlocutory appeal of a medical malpractice claim where Baylor University Medical Center, Edmund Sanchez, M.D., and Srinath Chinnakotla, M.D. (appellants) challenged the trial court’s denial of their motions to dismiss. The family of Cheri Jean Wells Biggs, who died after a rabies-infected kidney transplant, sued the appellants for failing to obtain informed consent regarding the high-risk donor's medical and social history. The appellants argued that the family’s expert reports were deficient under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 74.351(r)(6) for not providing a fair summary of opinions on the standard of care, breach, and causation for each defendant. The appellate court agreed, finding the expert reports deficient for both Baylor and the doctors. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's order and remanded the case for the trial court to determine whether the family should be granted an extension to cure the deficiencies in their expert reports.

Medical MalpracticeInformed ConsentKidney TransplantExpert Witness SufficiencyTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeStandard of CareCausationAppellate ReviewMotion for RehearingInterlocutory Appeal
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Klussman v. A.T. Reynolds & Sons, Inc.

Plaintiff Michael Klussman, a tractor-trailer driver, was injured while off-loading water bottles, leading to a lawsuit against the water distributor, Leisure Time, and the building occupant, Cure Connections. The Supreme Court initially denied Leisure Time's motion for summary judgment but granted Cure Connections'. On appeal, the decision was modified, with Leisure Time's motion for summary judgment being granted and the complaint against them dismissed. The appellate court determined that Klussman's chosen method of unloading, moving a heavy load at a faster speed down an incline, was the proximate cause of his injury, rather than any defective equipment provided by Leisure Time.

summary judgmentnegligencespecial employeeproximate causeworkers' compensation lawpallet jackloading dock accidentpersonal injuryappellate reviewduty of care
References
0
Case No. LBO 0355310 LBO 0355386
Regular
Nov 15, 2007

ARMANDO BAUTISTA vs. EL BURRITO JR. MEXICAN FOOD, FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

This case involves a dispute over a lien claimant's entitlement to payment for medical treatment. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the previous order, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found the medical record deficient on key issues, including whether the applicant sustained an industrial injury and if the treatment was reasonably required to cure it.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationCompromise and ReleaseLien ClaimantMedical Fee ScheduleIndustrial InjuryCausationMedical TreatmentBurden of ProofSupplementation of Record
References
4
Case No. ADJ7224109
Regular
May 04, 2015

FRANCISCO ZAZUETA vs. REXHALL INDUSTRIES, INC., PENNSYLVANIA MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION INSURANCE COMPANY, ILLINOIS MIDWEST INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTEAD COMPANIES

Lien claimants sought reconsideration of stipulations settling their liens, claiming their representative exceeded her authority. The Appeals Board dismissed both petitions due to their "skeletal" nature, lacking legal and evidentiary support. Additionally, one petition lacked proper service, and the other was unverified, failing to cure the defect after notice. These procedural deficiencies and the lack of substantive grounds justified the dismissal of the petitions for reconsideration.

Lien claimantsPetition for ReconsiderationStipulation and OrderWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJSkeletal petitionVerificationProof of serviceDismissalAIM Liens
References
1
Case No. ADJ10447246
Regular
Dec 12, 2019

Corliss Anderson vs. WAL-MART STORES INC, YORK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration and denied her Petition for Removal. The applicant sought reconsideration of an order suspending her petition to quash a subpoena duces tecum due to missing documentation. The Board found that the order was not a final order, making reconsideration improper, and that removal was not warranted as the applicant could still cure the deficiencies. Therefore, the applicant's requests were dismissed and denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalSubpoena Duces TecumPetition to QuashOrder Suspending ActionFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderDiscovery IssuePrejudice
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Menin v. Tully

The petitioner, an estate planner and life insurance agent, sought to review a State Tax Commission determination sustaining a deficiency assessment for unincorporated business taxes for various years between 1964 and 1974. The respondent concluded that the petitioner was an independent contractor rather than an employee. Petitioner worked under an agent’s career contract for New England Life Insurance Company and its general agent, but also sold insurance for other principals and operated with considerable independence, including maintaining his own office and incurring substantial business expenses. The court affirmed the determination, finding substantial evidence to support the conclusion that the petitioner was an independent contractor and therefore subject to the unincorporated business tax.

unincorporated business taxindependent contractorinsurance agentState Tax Commissiontax assessmentCPLR Article 78employer controlbusiness expensestax deficiencyappellate review
References
8
Case No. ADJ9381403
Regular
Oct 09, 2015

FILICIANA QUINTERO vs. PBC HOLDING CORPORATION dba COMMERCIAL CLEANING SYSTEMS, STARR INDEMNITY AND LIABILITY COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration. The Board found the petition to be skeletal and unsupported by specific record references or legal authority. The applicant's request to further develop the medical record was also denied, as discovery closed at the mandatory settlement conference, and she had ample opportunity to cure evidentiary deficiencies prior to trial. The Board adopted the judge's reasoning that the applicant failed to meet her burden of proof and acted contrary to her own interests.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationSubstantial Medical EvidencePanel Qualified Medical ExaminerWCJ Report and RecommendationLabor Code § 5902Labor Code § 5502(d)(3)Mandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery Cut-offFurther Medical Record Development
References
6
Case No. ADJ3732643 (OXN 0133370)
Regular
Aug 12, 2011

JAIME GONZALEZ vs. HAMLIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.

This case concerns Granite State Insurance Company (AIG) seeking reconsideration of a prior order finding their workers' compensation policy with Hamlin Development Corporation valid and in force at the time of applicant Jaime Gonzalez's injury. The Board denied reconsideration, upholding the arbitrator's finding that AIG failed to properly and timely cancel the policy. AIG's cancellation notice was deemed defective because it lacked statutory grounds, did not explain how to cure the alleged deficiency, and did not notify the insured's intermediaries. Therefore, AIG remains obligated to defend Hamlin and provide benefits to Gonzalez.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGranite State Insurance CompanyHamlin Development CorporationJaime GonzalezInsurance Code section 676.8Notice of CancellationPremium Finance AgreementInsurexConcord InsuranceCananwill
References
0
Case No. 13-07-00277-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 17, 2008

Corpus Christi Housing Authority v. Maria Lara

The Corpus Christi Housing Authority appealed the dismissal of its forcible detainer action against tenant Maria Lara. The housing authority terminated Lara's lease due to alleged criminal activity. The trial court dismissed the action, ruling that the housing authority's notice of lease termination was defective as it failed to specify the judicial eviction procedure and the type of criminal activity, as mandated by federal regulations, and that this defect deprived the court of subject-matter jurisdiction. The appellate court reversed the dismissal, finding that while the notice was indeed deficient, such defects are not jurisdictional and should lead to abatement of the action to allow the housing authority to cure the notice, rather than outright dismissal. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.

Forcible DetainerLease TerminationHousing AuthorityFederal RegulationsDue ProcessNotice RequirementsJurisdictionAbatementReversalRemand
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bolton Broadcasting Ltd. v. Meredith Corp.

The plaintiff, Bolton Broadcasting, Ltd., sued Meredith Corporation and MMT Sales, Inc., alleging breach of contract, inducement of breach of contract, tortious interference with contract, and violations of federal antitrust laws (Sherman Act § 1, Clayton Act § 3 and § 7). The defendants moved to dismiss the antitrust claims for failure to state claims. The court found that Bolton failed to adequately define the relevant market for antitrust purposes in all three counts. Consequently, the second count was dismissed, and the first and third counts were dismissed without prejudice, allowing Bolton to refile with cured deficiencies. The court also suggested that Bolton consider addressing its contract claims to state courts if the antitrust claims were not meritorious.

Antitrust LawSherman ActClayton ActBreach of ContractTortious InterferenceMotion to DismissExclusive DealershipMarket DefinitionRule 12(b)(6)Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 797 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