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

Ackerson v. Clarendon National Insurance Co.

Appellant, an injured worker, sought review after the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission’s Appeals Panel denied his claim as untimely. The panel ruled his request for review was filed one day past the fifteen-day deadline, calculating receipt of the Commission's decision on Labor Day, September 4, 2000. The district court affirmed this decision. On appeal, the court examined the Commission's rules on computing time periods, specifically regarding deemed receipt and non-working days. It concluded that because Labor Day was not a working day, the deemed receipt date should have been extended to the next working day, September 5, making the appellant's filing timely. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationAppeal DeadlineDeemed ReceiptStatutory InterpretationLabor DayTimelinessRemandAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewTexas Law
References
7
Case No. 08-03-00414-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2004

Trinity Universal Insurance Company v. Rebecca L. Day and Texas Workers' Compensation Commission

Trinity Universal Insurance Company appealed a judgment in favor of Rebecca L. Day regarding her claim for supplemental income benefits. The central issue was whether Trinity had timely filed its Request for Review with the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (TWCC) Appeals Panel, which was crucial for the trial court's jurisdiction. The TWCC and the trial court found Trinity's appeal to be untimely. The Court of Appeals examined the interpretation of 28 Tex.Admin.Code § 102.5(d) concerning the deemed date of receipt for communications from the TWCC. The court ultimately concluded that Trinity's appeal was timely filed under the deemed receipt rule, thereby reversing the trial court's decision and remanding the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationJurisdictionTimeliness of AppealAppellate ReviewAdministrative LawStatutory InterpretationTexas Court of AppealsInsurance LawDeemed Receipt RulePlea to the Jurisdiction
References
6
Case No. 03-03-00627-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 2005

Garry Ackerson v. Clarendon National Insurance Company

Appellant, injured on the job, filed a claim with the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission against his employer's insurance carrier, appellee. The Commission granted partial relief, but its Appeals Panel denied the appellant's request for review, ruling it was filed one day late, beyond the fifteen-day appeal deadline. The district court affirmed this decision. Appellant argued that the Commission's general rules for computing time periods should extend the five-day deemed receipt provision, thereby delaying the start of the fifteen-day appeals period by one day. The appellate court agreed with the appellant, finding that the Labor Day holiday should have extended the deemed receipt date, making the appeal timely. Therefore, the court reversed the district court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationAppeal DeadlineDeemed ReceiptStatutory InterpretationAdministrative RulesTexas LawLabor Day HolidayTimeliness of AppealInjured WorkerLiberal Construction
References
7
Case No. 03-03-00458-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 12, 2004

Anderson-Clayton Bros. Funeral Home, Inc. Restland of Dallas, Inc. Restland Funeral Home Singing Hills Funeral Home, Inc. Laurel Land Funeral Home of Forth Worth, Inc. Blue Bonnet Hills Funeral Home, Inc. And Blue Bonnet Hills Memorial Park, Inc. v. Carole Keeton Strayhorn, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas And Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas

This case addresses the Texas franchise tax treatment of earnings from out-of-state investments made by Texas prepaid funeral benefits trusts. The Appellants, a group of affiliated funeral homes (Anderson-Clayton), argued these earnings should be considered out-of-state receipts for franchise tax apportionment. The Comptroller of Public Accounts contended they were Texas receipts, leading to a higher tax bill for Anderson-Clayton. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Comptroller. The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that the 'accounting methods' provision of the tax code did not dictate the sourcing of receipts, and under the 'location of the payor' rule, the Texas-domiciled trusts were deemed the payors, making the investment income Texas receipts.

Franchise TaxInvestment EarningsPrepaid Funeral TrustsTax ApportionmentTexas Tax CodeLocation of Payor RuleSummary JudgmentStatutory ConstructionAccounting MethodsEarned Surplus
References
82
Case No. 2015-06-0867
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2016

Lunsford, Shannon v. Deem First

Shannon Lunsford, an employee, sought workers' compensation benefits from his employer, Deem First, and its insurance carrier, Amerisure, following a work-related injury on July 22, 2015. Mr. Lunsford requested an expedited hearing to address his entitlement to an evaluation for a permanent impairment rating for a facial injury, a panel of physicians for a low back injury and a left knee injury, additional temporary total disability benefits, and a recalculation of his average weekly wage. The Court granted Mr. Lunsford's request for a panel of orthopedic specialists for his left knee and an evaluation for permanent facial impairment. However, the Court denied his request for a new panel of back specialists that excluded Dr. West and found him not entitled to temporary total disability benefits beyond December 24, 2015. Deem First was also ordered to provide a compliant wage statement for a 'like employee' to calculate Mr. Lunsford's compensation rate.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsExpedited HearingFacial Injury ImpairmentLeft Knee InjuryLow Back InjuryTemporary Total DisabilityAverage Weekly Wage CalculationPanel of PhysiciansMedical CausationStatutory Interpretation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2009

People v. Nunn

This case addresses whether a court's discretion to deem a misdemeanor complaint charging a drug offense as an information, without a field test or laboratory analysis, violates a defendant's due process rights. The court distinguishes People v Kalin and Matter of Jahron S., applying the three-factor test from Mathews v Eldridge. It concludes that the substantial private interest in physical liberty and the risk of erroneous deprivation necessitate a laboratory report or field test in most drug-related cases, imposing minimal burden on the prosecution. Specifically, for defendant Mr. Nunn, the misdemeanor complaint was deemed an information on June 1, 2009, after the certified laboratory analysis was filed.

Due ProcessCriminal ProcedureMisdemeanorControlled SubstanceDrug PossessionMisdemeanor InformationMisdemeanor ComplaintPrima Facie CaseLaboratory AnalysisField Test
References
21
Case No. 02-20-00070-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 26, 2021

John Nguyen and Jeslyn Tran v. Minh Nguyen and Nga Le

Appellants John Nguyen and Jeslyn Tran (Managers) appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of appellees Minh Nguyen and Nga Le (Co-owners). The dispute originated from alleged unpaid profit distributions from SJN Hollywood Nails & Spa LLC, a business jointly owned and managed by the parties. Managers claimed the dispute was resolved by a settlement agreement, but Co-owners argued the agreement's conditions for release were not met. The trial court's decision was largely based on deemed admissions due to Managers' repeated discovery misconduct, despite Managers' claims of non-receipt and illness. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no abuse of discretion in deeming the admissions given the Managers' pattern of discovery abuse and that the settlement's release provision was conditional and not fully satisfied. The court also upheld the award of attorney's fees.

Summary JudgmentDeemed AdmissionsDiscovery SanctionsContract DisputeBreach of Fiduciary DutySettlement AgreementAttorney's FeesCivil ProcedureAppellate ReviewBusiness Organizations Code
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2004

Trinity Universal Insurance Company v. Rebecca L. Day and Texas Workers' Compensation Commission

Trinity Universal Insurance Company appeals a judgment in favor of Rebecca L. Day and the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission (TWCC). The central issue is the timeliness of Trinity's Request for Review with the TWCC Appeals Panel, which impacts the trial court's jurisdiction. Rebecca Day sustained an injury in 1997 and subsequently applied for supplemental income benefits. A contested hearing in 2002 resulted in a decision that was mailed and placed in Trinity's Austin representative's box on July 24, 2002. Trinity filed its appeal with the TWCC Appeals Panel on August 15, 2002, which was deemed untimely by both the Appeals Panel and the trial court, leading to a finding of no jurisdiction. Trinity argued that under 28 TEX.ADMIN.CODE § 102.5(d), the deemed date of receipt was July 25, 2002, making their appeal timely. The appellate court concurred with Trinity's interpretation of the administrative code, thereby reversing the trial court's decision and remanding the case for further proceedings.

JurisdictionTimeliness of AppealWorkers' CompensationAdministrative CodePlea to JurisdictionDeemed Receipt DateAppellate ReviewStatutory ConstructionRemandInsurance Carrier
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Faraino v. Centennial Insurance

This case addresses whether an insurer, having received a loan receipt from its insured, has a duty of good faith beyond mere payment. The court holds that such a duty is created by equity, implied contractual covenants, and the conflict of interest arising from the insurer's exclusive control over the insured's claims. The plaintiff boat owner alleged the insurers failed to provide independent counsel, policy information, or investigation results, potentially breaching this obligation. Consequently, the insurers' motion for summary judgment and dismissal was denied, affirming their proper joinder as defendants. The court also raises the possibility that the insurers' conduct could constitute a waiver of their subrogation rights.

Good Faith DutyInsurer ObligationsLoan ReceiptSubrogation RightsConflict of InterestInsurance Contract LawSummary Judgment DenialAttorney FeesEquitable PrinciplesContractual Subrogation
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 19, 2011

Turner v. City of New York

Petitioner was injured on April 14, 2009, and initially believed their claim was covered by Workers' Compensation, delaying legal counsel until July 13, 2010. Counsel promptly served a notice of claim and sought an order to deem it timely filed nunc pro tunc. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted this motion. However, the appellate court unanimously reversed the decision, ruling that the application made on July 14, 2010, was untimely. The court determined that the one-year and 90-day limitations period, as outlined in General Municipal Law § 50-i (1) and General Construction Law §§ 20, 58, had expired on July 13, 2010, rendering the application one day too late.

Notice of ClaimTimelinessNunc Pro TuncGeneral Municipal LawGeneral Construction LawLimitations PeriodAppellate ReviewWorkers' CompensationTort ActionMunicipality
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 3,599 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