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. 15-24-00097-CV, D-1-GN-24-003462
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 18, 2025

Randal Law v. Texas Department of Insurance – Division of Workers' Compensation Subsequent Injury Fund, Jeff Nelson, Kara MacE, and Blaise Gerstenlauer

The appellant, Randal Law, challenges the Texas Department of Insurance – Division of Workers’ Compensation – Subsequent Injury Fund (TDI-DWC-SIF) regarding the implementation of a new rule, 28 TAC §131.5. Mr. Law, a recipient of Lifetime Income Benefits (LIBs) for a catastrophic injury, argues that the TDI-DWC-SIF acted ultra vires by imposing a monthly verification requirement for LIBs, which he claims directly conflicts with Texas Labor Code §§ 408.161(a) and 408.201. He asserts that these statutes mandate LIBs payments until death and exempt benefits from other actions or claims, leaving no discretion for administrative interference. The appellant contends that the new rule unlawfully transforms legislative intent, imposes an undue burden on injured workers, and has caused him significant financial hardship. He seeks to reverse the district court's decision on jurisdiction and for the appellate court to rule in favor of the plaintiff's jurisdiction and address the questions of law.

Lifetime Income Benefits (LIBs)Ultra ViresSovereign Immunity ExceptionAdministrative Rule ChallengeStatutory ConstructionTexas Labor LawAppellate JurisdictionState Agency DiscretionInjured Employee RightsDue Process Violation
References
5
Case No. 2013-64138
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 31, 2014

Marvinell Harlan v. Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation (TDI-DWC), Dr. Ikedinobi Eni, and Administrative Hearing Officer Jacque Coleman

MISSING

Workers CompensationCivil CaseAppellateTexasCourt of AppealsPro SeJudgment Date
References
1
Case No. 01-14-00479-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 22, 2015

Marvinell Harlan v. North Forest ISD Self-Insured Carrier

This order addresses the timeliness of Marvinell Harlan's notice of appeal in a case against the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers’ Compensation (TDI-DWC), Dr. Ikedinobi Eni, and Administrative Hearing Officer Jacque Coleman. The State contended the appeal was untimely, but the Court found that Harlan's prior motion for new trial extended the appellate deadlines to 90 days, rendering her notice timely filed. The Court further directed corrections to the appellate case name and the trial court cause number to accurately reflect the involved parties and severed case. Appellees have been requested to file a brief or waiver by October 22, 2015.

Timeliness of AppealNotice of AppealMotion for New TrialSeverance OrderProcedural RulingTexas Rules of Appellate ProcedureTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureWorkers' Compensation AppealsPlea to the JurisdictionMotion to Dismiss
References
3
Case No. 03-17-00758-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 20, 2018

Charles Holt, Mike Dixon, Tim Nations, and Leonel Acevedo v. Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers' Compensation Commissioner Ryan Brannan, in His Official Capacity as DWC Commissioner The State of Texas Through the Honorable Ken Paxton, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of Texas And the City of Austin

Appellants Charles Holt, Mike Dixon, Tim Nations, and Leonel Acevedo challenged the 'backdating' of their maximum medical improvement (MMI) dates, the use of Official Disability Guidelines (ODG), and the 'designated doctor system' in Texas workers' compensation cases. They sued the Texas Department of Insurance–Division of Workers’ Compensation, its commissioner, the State of Texas, and the City of Austin after losing temporary income benefits due to retrospective MMI dates. The trial court granted the appellees' pleas to the jurisdiction, dismissing all claims against TDI and the State, and dismissing the claims for declaratory, mandamus, and injunctive relief. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal, finding appellants waived claims against the City and that the State was not a proper party. The court also determined that temporary income benefits were not vested property rights, thus rejecting the takings claim, and upheld the statutory limits on attorney's fees.

Workers' CompensationMaximum Medical ImprovementMMI BackdatingDesignated Doctor SystemSovereign ImmunityJudicial ReviewDeclaratory ReliefUltra ViresAttorney's FeesTakings Claim
References
41
Case No. 03-14-00808-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 27, 2015

Rosendo Morales v. Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers' Compensation, and Commissioner Ryan Brannan, in His Official Capacity

This case involves questions of law and statutory violations by the Texas Department of Insurance-Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC) and Commissioner Ryan Brannan, and Texas Mutual Insurance Company. Appellant Rosendo Morales, an injured worker, challenges the DWC's final administrative decision which improperly limited his impairment rating following a multi-level cervical spinal fusion surgery. Morales argues the District Court erred in dismissing the DWC and Commissioner based on sovereign immunity, as the state agency is a necessary party for statutory interpretation and enforcement. He seeks a declaratory judgment to ensure proper application of the Texas Labor Code and AMA Guides, especially regarding the consideration of pre-MMI surgeries in impairment ratings, citing prior rulings that allow such actions against the DWC.

Workers' CompensationDeclaratory JudgmentStatutory InterpretationSovereign ImmunityImpairment RatingSpinal FusionMaximum Medical ImprovementAppellate ProcedureJudicial ReviewTexas Labor Code
References
47
Case No. 10-10-00391-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 2011

in Re Texas Mutual Insurance Company

Texas Mutual Insurance Company sought a writ of mandamus from the Tenth Court of Appeals to compel Judge Robert G. Dohoney to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Leroy Bell. Texas Mutual argued that Bell failed to exhaust administrative remedies with the Division of Worker’s Compensation (DWC) regarding his Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI) date and impairment rating, which were crucial to his claims against Texas Mutual for aiding and abetting, conspiracy, and tortious interference with a contract. The Appeals Court denied the petition. It clarified that while Bell is barred from challenging the DWC's final determinations on MMI and impairment due to lack of administrative exhaustion, the trial court retains jurisdiction over Bell’s separate claims of wrongful termination and tortious interference, as these do not require a direct or indirect re-adjudication of the DWC's findings. The DWC's findings will serve as uncontrovertible facts in the trial court.

MandamusWorkers' Compensation ActAdministrative ExhaustionSubject Matter JurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionJudicial ReviewMaximum Medical Improvement (MMI)Impairment RatingWrongful TerminationTortious Interference
References
10
Case No. 02-17-00269-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2017

in Re Old Republic Insurance Company

In this workers' compensation case, Relator Old Republic Insurance Company sought mandamus relief after the trial court denied its plea to the jurisdiction. Old Republic argued that the real party in interest, Trena Jones, had not exhausted her administrative remedies with the Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC) regarding her claim for lifetime-income benefits (LIBs). Jones, who sustained severe work-related injuries in 2006, had her LIB claim denied by a DWC hearing officer and subsequently by an appeals panel. She then sought judicial review. The appellate court found that the DWC had not fully resolved the extent of Jones's compensable injury for LIB purposes, a prerequisite for trial court jurisdiction. Therefore, the appellate court concluded that the trial court abused its discretion by denying Old Republic's plea to the jurisdiction and conditionally granted mandamus relief, directing the trial court to vacate its order and abate proceedings until the DWC resolves the underlying administrative issues.

Workers' CompensationLifetime Income Benefits (LIBs)Plea to the JurisdictionExhaustion of Administrative RemediesMandamus ReliefJudicial ReviewAppellate ProcedureTexas Court of AppealsContested Case HearingDWC (Division of Workers’ Compensation)
References
16
Case No. 03-07-00007-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2009

in Re Richard Scheller

HCA Healthcare Corporation and other hospitals (the Hospitals) sued the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI), its Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC), and Commissioner Albert Betts, Jr. for declaratory and injunctive relief. Texas Mutual Insurance Company and other insurers intervened in support of DWC. The Hospitals sought to reverse 1,406 DWC decisions and claimed a right to a contested case hearing in medical disputes under former Texas Labor Code section 413.031. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Hospitals and Texas Mutual regarding the right to a hearing but denied the Hospitals' request to reverse the DWC decisions. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's denial of the Hospitals' request to set aside the 1,406 decisions, finding a lack of jurisdiction due to non-compliance with the 30-day appeal period, and reversed the trial court's declaration that former subsection 413.031(k) of the labor code was facially unconstitutional.

Workers' CompensationMedical Dispute ResolutionJudicial ReviewSummary JudgmentFacial ConstitutionalityStatutory InterpretationAdministrative LawJurisdictionDue ProcessAppellate Procedure
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

HCA Healthcare Corp. v. Texas Department of Insurance

This case involves HCA Healthcare Corporation and other hospitals (collectively, "the Hospitals") who filed suit for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Texas Department of Insurance, its Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC), and Commissioner Albert Betts, Jr. The Hospitals sought to reverse 1,406 decisions issued by DWC and challenged the facial constitutionality of former Texas Labor Code § 413.031(k) for allegedly failing to provide a right to a contested case hearing in medical disputes. Texas Mutual Insurance Company also intervened. The trial court initially granted summary judgment for the Hospitals and Texas Mutual on the right to a hearing but denied the Hospitals' request to set aside the 1,406 DWC orders. On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's denial of the Hospitals' request to set aside the DWC decisions, citing a lack of jurisdiction due to untimely appeals. Furthermore, the court reversed the trial court's declaration that former § 413.031(k) was facially unconstitutional, rendering judgment that the statute is indeed facially constitutional.

Medical Dispute ResolutionWorkers' CompensationTexas Labor CodeFacial ConstitutionalityJudicial ReviewAdministrative Procedure ActSummary JudgmentAppellate CourtDeclaratory ReliefInjunctive Relief
References
16
Case No. 03-07-00007-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2009

HCA Healthcare Corporation \\ Albert Betts, Jr. and Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation v. Texas Department of Insurance Albert Betts, Jr. and Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation\\ HCA Healthcare Corporation

This case concerns an appeal from the District Court of Travis County regarding the constitutionality of a provision within the Texas Labor Code related to medical dispute resolution in workers' compensation. HCA Healthcare Corporation and other hospitals ("the Hospitals") initially sued the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) and its Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC), seeking to reverse 1,406 DWC decisions and challenging the constitutionality of former Texas Labor Code § 413.031(k). The trial court granted summary judgment for the Hospitals, finding the subsection unconstitutional for not providing a contested case hearing, but denied reversing the DWC decisions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial to set aside the 1,406 DWC decisions, ruling that the district court lacked jurisdiction due to the Hospitals' failure to file timely petitions for judicial review. Additionally, the appellate court reversed the declaration of unconstitutionality, holding that former Texas Labor Code § 413.031(k) is facially constitutional, as the Hospitals did not demonstrate its unconstitutionality across all applications, including medical necessity disputes.

Workers' CompensationMedical DisputesConstitutional LawAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewSummary JudgmentAppellate JurisdictionTexas Labor CodeDeclaratory JudgmentFacial Challenge
References
17
Showing 1-10 of 101 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