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. 03-98-00598-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 15, 1999

Hazel Simpson, Individually and as Next Friend of Her Minor Son Brandon Simpson v. State of Texas Texas Youth Commission Giddings State School Steve Robinson, Individually and as Executive Director of the Texas Youth Commission and Stan Degerolami as Superintendent of Giddings State School And Sandra Burnham, Individually

Hazel Simpson, individually and as next friend of her son Brandon Simpson, appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of the appellees. Simpson had sued for common-law damages after being sexually assaulted by a student while teaching at Giddings State School, having previously received workers' compensation benefits. Her suit alleged negligence and intentional acts/omissions by appellees for failing to ensure her safety. The trial court barred her claim under Texas Labor Code section 408.001, finding workers' compensation as the exclusive remedy. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that Simpson's allegations did not constitute intentional conduct under the "substantial certainty" test, thus her claims and her son's derivative loss of consortium claim were barred.

Workers' CompensationExclusive RemedyIntentional TortSummary JudgmentNegligenceSexual Assault (workplace)Loss of ConsortiumTexas Labor CodeSafe WorkplaceSubstantial Certainty Test
References
10
Case No. 03-96-00577-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 08, 1998

Larry W. Kimes, P.C. and Larry W. Kimes v. Clarence Simpson, Phyllis Simpson, Ed Childress, Fern Childress, Bertha Simpson, and Clarence Simpson as the Representative of the Estate of H. C. Simpson

Kimes, an attorney, appealed a post-answer default judgment after paying appellees with insufficient funds checks. The trial court had granted interlocutory summary judgment on liability and subsequently rendered a final default judgment assessing damages. Kimes filed for bankruptcy, which was later dismissed, and then objected to the trial proceeding, but failed to appear or file a motion for new trial. The appellate court found Kimes's failure to file a motion for new trial precluded review of his attacks on the default judgment. The court also overruled his complaint about not staying litigation for arbitration due to waiver. The judgment was modified to reflect a credit for a payment made to one appellee and, as modified, affirmed.

Default judgmentAppealInsufficient fundsBankruptcyMotion for new trialWaiverArbitrationAttorney misconductCivil procedureTexas Court of Appeals
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Simpson v. State

Appellant Hazel Simpson sued appellees for common-law damages after being sexually assaulted during her employment, despite having received workers’ compensation benefits. Appellees moved for summary judgment, arguing her claim was barred by section 408.001 of the Texas Labor Code, which designates workers’ compensation as the exclusive remedy. Simpson contended her suit fell under an exception for intentional torts, asserting appellees' omissions were substantially certain to cause injury. The court, citing Reed Tool Co. v. Copelin, clarified that an intentional failure to provide a safe workplace only constitutes an intentional injury if the employer believed their conduct was substantially certain to cause the injury. The court found Simpson's allegations did not constitute intentional conduct under the 'substantial certainty' test, deeming them negligence. Consequently, Simpson’s claims, and her son’s derivative loss of consortium claim, were barred. The trial court's grant of summary judgment for appellees was affirmed.

Sexual AssaultWorkers' CompensationExclusive Remedy DoctrineIntentional Tort ExceptionEmployer NegligenceSummary Judgment AppealTexas Labor CodeLoss of Parental ConsortiumSubstantial Certainty TestWorkplace Safety
References
9
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 04524 [186 AD3d 23]
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 2020

Matter of Doris

The Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) initiated a disciplinary proceeding against attorney Lawrence A. Doris following client complaints of professional misconduct, including failure to file a personal injury case and lack of communication. Despite numerous attempts by the AGC through letters, emails, and a judicial subpoena, Mr. Doris failed to respond to the allegations or appear for a deposition. The AGC subsequently moved for his immediate suspension from the practice of law due to his willful noncompliance and failure to cooperate with their investigation. The Appellate Division, First Department, granted the AGC's motion, finding that Mr. Doris's conduct warranted immediate suspension. This decision underscores the importance of attorney cooperation in disciplinary matters and protection of the public interest.

Attorney disciplineProfessional misconductNoncooperation with investigationImmediate suspensionGrievance CommitteeClient complaintFailure to communicateJudicial subpoenaPublic interest threatAppellate Division
References
6
Case No. 03-95-00601-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 14, 1997

David Simpson v. Trinity Universal Insurance Company

David Simpson sued Gerald Black for negligence following an automobile accident, and Trinity Universal Insurance Company for breach of contract related to underinsured motorist benefits. After a first trial, Simpson's breach of contract claim against Trinity was improperly severed into a second trial where Simpson received a favorable judgment. On appeal, the court determined the original trial court erred by failing to render a take-nothing judgment against Simpson on his breach of contract claim against Trinity and by severing the claim after jury submission. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the judgment and rendered that Simpson take nothing against Trinity.

Automobile AccidentInsurance ContractUnderinsured Motorist BenefitsBreach of ContractSeverance of ClaimsJury SubmissionAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewJudgment ReversalDamages
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Simpson v. State Office of Risk Management

Carol G. Simpson, an employee of the Texas Workforce Commission, appealed a judgment in favor of the State Office of Risk Management (SORM) concerning her workers' compensation claim. Simpson developed tenosynovitis and carpal tunnel syndrome due to repetitive typing. After initial approvals by a hearing officer and the Appeals Panel, the district court reversed the decision, leading to Simpson's appeal. The appellate court found the evidence legally insufficient to support the jury's finding that Simpson did not sustain a repetitive trauma injury, reversing the trial court's judgment and affirming the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel's decision.

Workers' CompensationRepetitive Trauma InjuryTenosynovitisCarpal Tunnel SyndromeSufficiency of EvidenceAppellate ReviewOccupational DiseaseErgonomic IssuesOrthopedic SurgeryNeurology Testimony
References
4
Case No. ADJ1528926 (LBO 0378215)
Regular
Jul 02, 2012

DORIS SIMPSON vs. ORC MACRO, LIBERTY MUTUAL ORANGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a prior award of back surgery for applicant Doris Simpson. The Board found the Agreed Medical Examiner's (AME) opinion regarding industrial causation for the surgery was inadequately explained. The case is returned to the trial level for further medical development, specifically to clarify whether the 2006 industrial injury contributed to the applicant's need for the surgery. The applicant has a history of prior lumbar surgeries and pre-existing degenerative conditions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDORIS SIMPSONORC MACROLIBERTY MUTUAL ORANGEADJ1528926LBO 0378215OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATIONDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONPrimary Treating PhysicianDr. Mudiyam
References
2
Case No. 11-04-00179-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 08, 2006

John Dori v. Bondex International, Inc.

John Dori sued Bondex International, Inc. for mesothelioma allegedly caused by exposure to Bondex's asbestos-containing joint compound. The jury found a design defect in Bondex's products but awarded no damages. The trial court entered a take-nothing judgment, which Dori appealed, arguing the zero-damage finding was against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, holding that Dori waived the argument regarding conflicting jury answers by not raising it before the jury's discharge. The court further determined that the no-damage findings were factually sufficient, given the considerable expert disagreement on whether Dori's specific type of mesothelioma could be caused by incidental chrysotile asbestos exposure from Bondex products.

MesotheliomaToxic TortPersonal InjuryAsbestos ExposureChrysotile AsbestosDesign DefectProducing CauseZero Damages RuleFactual SufficiencyJury Verdict
References
15
Case No. 08-06-00124-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 22, 2008

Carol G. Simpson v. State Office of Risk Management

Carol G. Simpson, an adjudicator for the Texas Workforce Commission, developed pain in her upper extremities from repetitive typing, leading to diagnoses of tenosynovitis and carpal tunnel syndrome by Dr. Robert Bell. Her worker's compensation claim was initially approved by a hearing officer and the TWCC Appeals Panel, but the State Office of Risk Management (SORM) successfully appealed to a district court, where a jury found against Simpson. On appeal, the Court of Appeals found the evidence legally insufficient to support the jury's finding that Simpson did not sustain a repetitive trauma injury in the course and scope of her employment. The court therefore reversed the trial court's judgment and rendered judgment affirming the TWCC Appeals Panel's decision in favor of Simpson.

Workers' CompensationRepetitive Trauma InjuryOccupational DiseaseTenosynovitisCarpal Tunnel SyndromeSufficiency of EvidenceMedical Expert TestimonyErgonomicsTexas Labor CodeAppeal
References
4
Case No. 08-03-00110-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2004

Michael Simpson v. Felipe Alanis, Commissioner of Education, and Midland Independent School District

Michael Simpson, a science teacher and soccer coach for Midland Independent School District (MISD), appealed the Commissioner of Education's decision to not renew his term contract. Simpson was accused of possessing alcohol (a twelve-pack of beer) in an MISD vehicle while on duty, traveling to a soccer clinic. He admitted to the purchase, stating it was 'a dumb thing to do.' The MISD Board of Trustees decided not to renew his contract, a decision affirmed by the Commissioner of Education and subsequently by the district court. Simpson argued that he was not in the scope of his duties when he purchased the beer. The Court of Appeals reviewed the Commissioner's decision under the substantial evidence rule and found that reasonable minds could have concluded that Simpson was within the scope of his duties, thus supporting the non-renewal. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Teacher Contract Non-RenewalAlcohol Possession On DutyScope of EmploymentAdministrative Law AppealSubstantial Evidence RuleTexas Education CodePublic School EmploymentCoaching MisconductJudicial Review of Agency DecisionAppellate Court Decision
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 82 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