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

Wolff v. Deputy Constables Ass'n of Bexar County

Appellee Deputy Constables Association of Bexar County sued appellants Nelson Wolff, et al. for violating the Fire and Police Employee Relations Act by failing to engage in collective bargaining. This is an interlocutory appeal from the trial court's denial of Wolff's plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss. Wolff contended the trial court erred because the Deputy Constables lack standing under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 174. The court analyzed the definition of 'police officer' under the Act, which requires employment in the 'police department' of a political subdivision. While deputy sheriffs are considered part of the 'police department' for a county, the court found Deputy Constables are employed by the Constable's Office, not the 'police department' or Sheriff's Office. Therefore, the court concluded that the Deputy Constables do not meet the definition of 'police officer' under the Act, lack standing to bring suit, and reversed the trial court’s denial of Wolff’s plea to the jurisdiction, rendering judgment in favor of Wolff.

Collective BargainingFire and Police Employee Relations ActTexas Local Government Code Chapter 174StandingPlea to JurisdictionMotion to DismissDeputy ConstablesPolice Officers DefinitionAppellate ReviewStatutory Interpretation
References
15
Case No. 04-13-00080-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 17, 2013

Nelson Wolff, County Judge of Bexar County Texas, Bexar County Commissioners Paul Elizondo, Tommy Adkisson, Sergio Chico Rodriguez and Kevin Wolff And Bexar County, Texas v. Deputy Constables Association of Bexar

The Deputy Constables Association of Bexar County sued Nelson Wolff, et al., alleging a violation of the Fire and Police Employee Relations Act for failing to engage in collective bargaining. The case originated from the trial court's denial of Wolff's plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss. The central legal question on appeal was whether the Deputy Constables possessed the standing to collectively bargain under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 174, which restricts this right to "police officers" employed in a political subdivision's "police department." The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, analyzed relevant statutory definitions and precedent, distinguishing between the Sheriff's Office (considered a "police department" for the county) and the Constable's Office. Concluding that Deputy Constables are not employed by the "police department" or the Sheriff's Office, the court determined they do not meet the statutory definition of "police officer" and thus lack standing to pursue their claim. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's decision and rendered judgment in favor of Wolff, dismissing the suit.

Collective BargainingStandingPolice OfficersLocal Government CodeBexar CountyConstable's OfficeSheriff's OfficeStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewPlea to Jurisdiction
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jefferson County Constables Association v. Jefferson County, Texas

The case involves an appeal by the Jefferson County Constables Association against Jefferson County, Texas, seeking to uphold an arbitration award. The County had filed suit to vacate the award, which mandated the reinstatement of deputy constables and back pay based on seniority, following layoffs that allegedly violated a collective bargaining agreement. The trial court sided with the County, vacating the award. On appeal, the Court determined that deputy constables possess collective bargaining rights under the FPERA, disagreeing with a prior ruling (Wolff). Furthermore, the Court concluded that the arbitrator's award did not overstep statutory authority regarding the appointment of deputy constables, distinguishing reinstatement from new appointments, and did not exceed his jurisdiction by interpreting the collective bargaining agreement's provisions on seniority and layoffs. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and rendered a decision in favor of the Constables Association, effectively upholding the arbitration award.

ArbitrationCollective BargainingLayoffsSeniority RightsDeputy ConstablesPolice OfficersFPERASubject Matter JurisdictionStandingPublic Policy
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Arbitration Between Monroe County Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n & Monroe County

The petitioner, representing Deputy Sheriffs, challenged an arbitration award concerning holiday pay. Five Deputy Sheriffs, scheduled to work on July 4, 2011, received only eight hours of holiday pay despite being granted the day off, not their regular shift pay plus holiday pay. The petitioner argued that the collective bargaining agreement and Military Law § 249 mandated additional payment. The arbitrator denied the grievance, concluding neither required the additional payment. The Supreme Court confirmed this award, and the appellate court affirmed, finding no excess of arbitral power, no irrational construction of the CBA, and no violation of public policy.

Collective Bargaining AgreementGrievanceArbitration AwardPublic PolicyMilitary LawHoliday PayDeputy SheriffsCPLR Article 75AffirmanceAppellate Review
References
6
Case No. CA 13-01106
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 2014

MONROE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF'S, MTR. OF

Petitioner, a bargaining representative for Deputy Sheriffs, sought to vacate an arbitration award that denied a grievance concerning holiday pay for five members on July 4, 2011. The Deputy Sheriffs were granted the day off with pay but were not compensated for their regular shifts in addition to the holiday pay, which petitioner alleged violated their collective bargaining agreement and Military Law § 249. The arbitrator denied the grievance, concluding that neither the CBA nor Military Law § 249 mandated the additional payment. The Supreme Court confirmed the arbitration award. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, finding the arbitrator did not exceed his authority, his construction of the CBA was not irrational, and the award did not violate public policy.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementHoliday Pay DisputeMilitary Law BenefitsGrievance DenialDeputy SheriffsPublic PolicyVacate ArbitrationAppellate ReviewLabor Relations
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Marshall v. Leavey

This case involves a petitioner's suit to review a Deputy Commissioner's finding of partial permanent disability and an order for the insurance carrier to pay compensation. The core issue is whether the Deputy Commissioner's findings regarding disability and wage-earning capacity are supported by substantial evidence. The court considered medical testimony from a neuro-surgeon, Dr. Harry Starr, detailing the petitioner's physical and emotional ailments and an estimated 20-25% medical disability. Testimony from the Texas Employment Commission on available light work and wages was also presented. The court ultimately affirmed the Deputy Commissioner's award, ruling that it was supported by substantial evidence, thus denying the petitioner's motion for summary judgment and granting those of the Deputy Commissioner and The Travelers Insurance Company.

Longshoremen's ActWorkers' CompensationPartial Permanent DisabilityWage-Earning CapacitySubstantial EvidenceMedical TestimonyNeuro-surgeryMental HealthAdministrative ReviewSummary Judgment
References
5
Case No. 03-97-00567-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 30, 1998

Memorial Medical Center of East Texas v. James A. Howard, Special Deputy Receiver of Texas Employers' Insurance Association and Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association

Memorial Medical Center of East Texas appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of James A. Howard, Special Deputy Receiver of Texas Employers' Insurance Association, and Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association. Memorial sought a declaration that the appellees were obligated to reimburse defense costs incurred in a separate suit brought by its employees. The trial court granted the appellees' motions for summary judgment without specifying the grounds. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that both the Receiver and the Association were statutorily precluded from defending Memorial or reimbursing its defense costs under relevant provisions of the Texas Insurance Code.

Summary judgmentInsurance CodeDuty to defendReimbursementImpaired insurerReceivershipGuaranty AssociationAppellate reviewStatutory interpretationWorkers' compensation insurance
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Clark v. Heard

Debra Lynn Clark sued officials of Harris County, including Deputy Olen Miguel Lawley and Constable C. R. Davis, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Texas common law for unlawful arrest due to mistaken identity. Clark was arrested based on warrants for "Debbi L. Clark" despite spelling differences and a different address. The court ruled the warrants were constitutionally valid, dismissing the § 1983 claim. However, Deputy Lawley and Constable Davis were found liable for false imprisonment under Texas common law. The court denied injunctive relief but awarded Clark $5,000 in compensatory damages, explicitly denying punitive damages.

Mistaken IdentityUnlawful ArrestFalse ImprisonmentCivil Rights ActDue ProcessFourth AmendmentTexas Common LawDeputy MisconductJudicial ImmunityDamages Awarded
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fowler v. Sheppeard

Jay Fowler, an employee of Todd Galveston Dry Docks, Inc., initiated a proceeding under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act to review a compensation award made by a Deputy Commissioner on August 17, 1944. Fowler contested the Deputy Commissioner's findings regarding his average weekly wage and annual earnings, claiming they lacked evidentiary support. District Judge KENNERLY reviewed the stenographic record, including stipulations concerning Fowler’s earnings and those of comparable employees, as outlined in Section 910, Title 33 U.S.C.A. The court concluded that the Deputy Commissioner's wage calculations were indeed unsupported by the evidence and stipulations. Consequently, the case was remanded to the Deputy Commissioner for a new hearing and determination of Fowler's average weekly wage according to the statutory guidelines.

Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation ActWage DeterminationAverage Weekly WageCompensation AwardJudicial ReviewRemandEvidentiary SupportStipulation33 U.S.C.A. Section 910Employment Earnings
References
0
Case No. 15-25-00013-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 07, 2025

State of Texas, the Texas Facilities Commission, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, Mike Novak, in His Official Capacity as Executive Director of the TFC, and Rolland Niles, in His Official Capacity as Deputy Executive Commissioner for the System Support Services Division of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission v. Broadmoor Austin Associates, a Texas Joint Venture

Broadmoor Austin Associates leased office space to the Texas government, specifically the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC), through the Texas Facilities Commission (TFC). Rent has been unpaid for nearly two years due to alleged misconduct by state officials. Broadmoor asserts that sovereign immunity does not bar its claims for breach of contract, citing Chapter 114's express waiver for contracts involving construction and related services. Additionally, Broadmoor brings ultra vires claims against TFC Executive Director Mike Novak and HHSC Deputy Executive Commissioner Roland Niles, alleging their actions were beyond legal authority or a failure to perform ministerial duties. Broadmoor seeks prospective injunctive and declaratory relief to ensure these officials comply with state law, specifically regarding the availability of appropriated funds for the lease.

Sovereign ImmunityBreach of ContractUltra Vires DoctrineState AgenciesGovernment ContractsLease AgreementsLegislative AppropriationsExecutive AuthorityJudicial ReviewTexas Facilities Commission
References
69
Showing 1-10 of 233 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