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. 04-24-00516-CV & 04-24-00521-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 2025

B&T Dependable Services, LLC and Bernell Gardener v. Edward Santos

Edward Santos, performing work for B&T Dependable Services, LLC, was injured in a truck accident. B&T had workers' compensation coverage, and Texas Mutual Insurance Company provided Santos benefits. Santos subsequently sued B&T and Bernell Gardener for negligence, disputing his employment status. An administrative law judge (ALJ) previously ruled Santos was an employee, and Santos did not appeal this decision. Appellants filed a plea to the jurisdiction and a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the exclusive remedy provision of the Texas Labor Code and the doctrine of election of remedies barred Santos's lawsuit. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the plea to the jurisdiction, citing recent Supreme Court precedent that the Division of Workers' Compensation does not hold exclusive jurisdiction over negligence claims not predicated on entitlement to benefits. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion for summary judgment, concluding that appellants failed to conclusively prove every element of their affirmative defense of election of remedies.

Workers' Compensation LawNegligence ClaimExclusive Remedy DoctrineElection of RemediesSubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate Court ReviewSummary Judgment DenialTexas Labor CodeEmployment Status DisputeAdministrative Remedies Exhaustion
References
19
Case No. 03-09-00666-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 30, 2011

Zurich American Insurance Company v. Chantal McVey as Beneficiary of Troy McVey

After her husband Troy McVey was killed in a motor vehicle accident while driving to Houston for a job-related training conference, Chantal McVey, as Troy's beneficiary, sought workers' compensation survivor benefits from Troy's employer's insurance carrier, Zurich American Insurance Company. Zurich denied coverage, asserting that Troy's death was not compensable because he had not been acting within the course and scope of his employment. The Division of Workers' Compensation found Troy's death compensable, a decision Zurich sought judicial review of in district court. The district court granted McVey's motion for summary judgment and denied Zurich's. On appeal, Zurich asserts the district court erred in its legal determination that Troy had been acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of his accident, but the court affirmed the district court's judgment.

Workers' CompensationCourse and Scope of EmploymentComing and Going RuleEmployer-Provided TransportationSpecial MissionCompensable InjurySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewMotor Vehicle AccidentTravel Expense
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State ex rel. Dunn v. Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children

Maureen M. Dunn filed a writ of habeas corpus to regain custody of "Baby Girl" Dunn, born April 6, 1986, after executing a surrender for adoption to Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children (CHB) on May 1, 1986. The child was placed with prospective adoptive parents, John and Mary Doe, on April 10, 1986. Dunn attempted to revoke her surrender on May 21, 1986, within the 30-day period stipulated by Social Services Law § 384(5). The adoptive parents moved to dismiss or transfer the case, arguing against Supreme Court jurisdiction. The court retained jurisdiction and, following hearings, addressed Dunn's claims of fraud, duress, or coercion in the surrender's execution, which it ultimately denied despite concerns about CHB's procedures and a witness's credibility. The court also clarified the application of Social Services Law §§ 383(6) and 384(5) regarding the natural mother's rights post-surrender, ruling that Dunn lost her presumption of superiority once the child was placed in an adoptive home, requiring the custody determination to be based solely on the child's best interests. Considering the stability, financial security, and family ties of the adoptive parents versus the natural mother's temporary employment, uncertain support from the natural father, and past substance use during pregnancy, the court found it in the child's best interest to remain with the adoptive parents and be adopted by them.

AdoptionChild CustodyHabeas CorpusSurrender of Parental RightsBest Interests of the ChildParental RightsSocial Services LawRevocation of SurrenderFraudDuress
References
10
Case No. 07-23-00326-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2024

Old Republic Insurance Company v. Sherri Evans, Beneficiary of Michael S. Evans

Michael S. Evans, an Xcel Energy safety consultant, tragically died in a motorcycle accident while returning home to retrieve his company laptop. His beneficiary, Sherri Evans, filed a claim for death and burial benefits under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act against Old Republic Insurance Company (ORIC). The administrative law judge initially denied benefits, but the DWC Appeals Panel reversed this, finding the injury compensable. A jury trial affirmed this, leading the trial court to award benefits. ORIC appealed, arguing Michael was not in the course and scope of his employment. The Court of Appeals agreed with ORIC, reversing the trial court's judgment and rendering that the injury was not compensable, applying the 'coming and going' rule and rejecting the 'special mission' exception.

Workers' CompensationCompensable InjuryCourse and Scope of EmploymentComing and Going RuleSpecial Mission ExceptionFatal AccidentMotorcycle PolicyAppellate ReviewLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceEmployer Policy Violation
References
7
Case No. 06-02-00011-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 10, 2002

Betty Manasco, as Workers' Compensation Beneficiary of the Estate of Jack Manasco v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania

Betty Manasco, as the workers' compensation beneficiary of Jack Manasco's estate, appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of the Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania. The case concerned whether a head injury sustained by Jack Manasco in the course of his employment caused his subsequent malignant brain tumor, which led to his death. Manasco contested the trial court's decision to exclude the testimony of her expert witness, Dr. Richard Hamer, a neurologist, and the subsequent granting of summary judgment. The appellate court reviewed the exclusion of expert testimony under an abuse of discretion standard, considering the reliability of scientific evidence and the Zülch/Manuelidis criteria for causation. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the medical literature did not establish a causal link through epidemiological or other studies, thereby deeming the exclusion of Dr. Hamer's testimony within the zone of reasonableness.

Workers' CompensationCausationExpert WitnessSummary JudgmentBrain TumorHead InjuryMedical EvidenceEpidemiologyReliability of EvidenceAbuse of Discretion
References
10
Case No. 04-14-00685-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2015

American Casualty Co. of Reading, Penn. v. Denise Bushman as Beneficiary of Clayton F. Bushman, Jr.

This is an unopposed motion filed by Appellee Denise Bushman, as beneficiary of Clayton F. Bushman, Jr., Deceased, requesting a 30-day extension to file her Appellee's Brief. The current deadline is January 14, 2015, and the requested extended deadline is February 13, 2015. The motion cites counsel's heavy workload, involvement in other judicial and administrative proceedings, family commitments, and the need for adequate time to review the record and law. Appellant's counsel is unopposed to the motion.

Appellate ProcedureMotion to ExtendBrief FilingTexasWorkers' CompensationUnopposed MotionDeadline ExtensionLegal PleadingGuadalupe CountyFourth Court of Appeals
References
3
Case No. 03-10-00034-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2011

State Office of Risk Management v. Erika M. Cole, as Sole Beneficiary of the Estate of Carolyn P. Cole

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed a no-evidence summary judgment granted to Erika M. Cole, beneficiary of Carolyn P. Cole's estate. SORM challenged determinations by the Department of Insurance--Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC) regarding Carolyn's impairment rating, maximum medical improvement date, and disability status. Erika argued SORM lacked evidence to contradict DWC's findings, which relied on a 'designated doctor's' report. The appellate court found SORM presented sufficient medical evidence, including reports from Dr. Gordon and Dr. Cochran, to create a genuine issue of material fact. Consequently, the trial court's summary judgment and attorney's fees award were reversed and the case remanded.

Impairment Rating DisputeMaximum Medical Improvement DateSupplemental Income Benefits EligibilityMedical Opinion ConflictDesignated Doctor PresumptionNo-Evidence Summary JudgmentJudicial Review of Agency DecisionCervical Spine InjuryPre-existing Medical ConditionWorkers' Compensation Appeals
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Westerhaus v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

Justice Lagarde dissents in a case concerning the readjudication of "future dependency" of a minor under the Workers' Compensation Act. In 1982, Stacie was found dependent, with an insurance company, Liberty, paying benefits until 1993 when it sought readjudication. The trial court's judgment allowed for readjudication based on a "material change of the then circumstances of dependency." Lagarde argues that Liberty's summary judgment evidence, which included Stacie's admissions about her financial independence and age, conclusively proved this material change. Therefore, Justice Lagarde would have affirmed the summary judgment in favor of Liberty.

Future DependencyMinor DependencyWorkers' CompensationReadjudicationMaterial Change of CircumstancesSummary JudgmentDissenting OpinionAdult Child DependencyFinancial IndependenceInsurance Benefits
References
0
Case No. 07-07-0288-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 28, 2009

State Office of Risk Management v. Rachel Leigh Herrera, Victoria Danielle Herrera, Matthew Ryen Herrera, Kelcey Mercedes Dena Herrera, Care'n Destiny Herrera, Beneficiaries of Jose Arturo Herrera, And Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed the trial court's dismissal of its lawsuit seeking judicial review of an appeals panel decision, which found SORM responsible for paying death benefits to the beneficiaries of deceased police officer Jose Herrera. Officer Herrera died in the line of duty, and SORM denied liability, arguing he was employed by the City of Friona, a self-insured entity, not the State. The trial court dismissed SORM's suit because SORM failed to timely name the City of Friona as a defendant within the statutory 40-day period. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, ruling that the City of Friona was an indispensable party and the 40-day limitations period was not tolled for misidentification of parties. The court also upheld the award of attorney's fees to certain Herrera defendants, deeming SORM's claims against them to be without foundation.

Workers' CompensationJudicial ReviewInsurance Carrier LiabilitySubject Matter JurisdictionIndispensable PartyAttorney's FeesStatutory BeneficiariesMisidentification of PartiesAppellate Court DecisionTexas Labor Law
References
20
Case No. ADJ1940516 (GOL 0101910)
Regular
Apr 29, 2011

TONY COSTANTINO (Deceased), ELLIE COSTANTINO (Widow), CIERA MILLENDER (Dependent) vs. SANTA BARBARA SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case concerns whether a stepdaughter is entitled to the conclusive presumption of total dependency for workers' compensation death benefits under Labor Code section 3501. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the prior award, holding that the conclusive presumption does not apply to stepchildren absent legal adoption. The Board found insufficient evidence regarding the stepdaughter's actual dependency and returned the matter for further proceedings to develop the record on this issue. The WCAB clarified that while stepchildren can be dependents, the specific statutory presumption of total dependency is limited to "children" under the law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryDeath BenefitsDependencyLabor Code Section 3501Conclusive PresumptionStepchildPartial DependentReconsiderationWCJ
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 633 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