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. 03-10-00034-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. 01-21-00008-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2024

Sealy Emergency Room, L.L.C. and Kannappan Krishnaswamy, M.D. v. Dr. Atul Dhingra, Dr. Swapan Dubey and Dr. Sanjeev Dubey

Appellants Sealy Emergency Room, L.L.C., and Dr. Kannappan Krishnaswamy appealed a trial court's summary judgment in favor of appellees Free Standing Emergency Room Managers of America, L.L.C., Dr. Atul Dhingra, Dr. Swapan Dubey, and Dr. Sanjeev Dubey. The dispute arose from a management agreement for an emergency room, with appellants bringing counterclaims and third-party claims for breach of contract, fraud, fraudulent inducement, and negligence. After a previous dismissal for lack of appellate jurisdiction was reversed by the Texas Supreme Court, the First District of Texas Court of Appeals reviewed the merits. The court found that the appellants failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact on any of their claims, concluding that the alleged breaches of contract were not supported by the agreement's plain language or that the best-efforts clause was unenforceable. Furthermore, claims of fraud and negligence were not substantiated or were barred by the economic loss rule. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment.

Contract DisputeSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewBreach of ContractFraudFraudulent InducementNegligenceEconomic Loss RuleTexas LawHealthcare Management
References
45
Case No. 03-10-00019-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 2011

Dr. Don Brantley, Belinda Castillo, Dr. Corinne Alvarez-Sanders and Patricia Logterman// Texas Youth Commission Cherrie Townsend in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director v. Texas Youth Commission Cherrie Townsend in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director// Dr. Don Brantley, Belinda Castillo, Dr. Corinne Alvarez-Sanders

This case concerns challenges by current and former employees of the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) against the constitutionality of Senate Bill 103, which converted TYC employment from 'for-cause' to 'at-will.' The plaintiffs, including Dr. Don Brantley, Belinda Castillo, Dr. Corinne Alvarez-Sanders, and Patricia Logterman, sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief based on alleged wrongful termination, due process violations, defamation, and unconstitutional takings. The district court partially granted and denied TYC's plea to the jurisdiction. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of Castillo's claims for lack of ripeness and the defamation and takings claims for all plaintiffs due to sovereign immunity. It reversed in part, allowing Alvarez-Sanders and Logterman to replead their wrongful-termination/due-process claims for equitable relief against a proper state official, and similarly reversed in part Brantley's wrongful-termination/due-process claim.

Employment LawPublic EmployeesAt-Will EmploymentFor-Cause EmploymentDue ProcessConstitutional LawRetroactive LegislationEx Post Facto LawBill of AttainderSovereign Immunity
References
37
Case No. 14-15-01031-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 20, 2017

Heather Tenini Kuentz, Individually, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Robert Michael Kuentz, and as Next Friend of XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX, a Minor, Larry Michael Robert Kuentz and Sandra Kuentz v. Cole Systems Group, Inc. D/B/A the Cole Group

Robert Kuentz, a sales manager, was fatally shot by a salesman, Keith Grimmett, who had been rehired by Mac Haik Chevrolet. Kuentz's family sued Cole Systems Group, an employment screening company, alleging negligence in performing Grimmett's pre-employment background check. The trial court granted summary judgment for Cole, which the appellate court affirmed. The appellate court ruled that Cole's duty was limited to the specific services agreed upon with Mac Haik and did not include a broader investigative or disclosure duty for information outside their contractual scope, such as civil or family court records. The court found no evidence that Cole failed to perform the contracted services or that Mac Haik relied on Cole for additional, uncontracted services.

NegligenceEmployment ScreeningBackground CheckDuty of CareSummary JudgmentTort LawThird-Party LiabilityForeseeabilityWrongful DeathAppellate Review
References
19
Case No. W2017-00487-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 20, 2018

Victor Cole v. Joe Caruso

Plaintiff Victor Cole sued Defendant Joe Caruso alleging unjust enrichment after their business association ended. A jury initially found Caruso unjustly enriched and awarded Cole $10,000, later increased by additur to $50,000. Caruso appealed, arguing Cole failed to establish a prima facie case for unjust enrichment. The Court of Appeals found that while Cole did confer benefits, he failed to present sufficient evidence that Caruso's retention of those benefits without further payment was unjust, especially given that Cole had already received $13,000 in compensation. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of Caruso's motion for directed verdict and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss the unjust enrichment claim.

Unjust EnrichmentDirected VerdictPrima Facie CaseAppellate ReviewQuasi-ContractContract Implied-in-LawCompensationBenefits ConferredTennessee Court of AppealsCivil Procedure
References
30
Case No. M2017-00187-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2018

Jimmy Earl McClure v. Christopher Shawn Cole

This case is a personal injury action stemming from a collision between a pickup truck driven by Jimmy Earl McClure and a dump truck driven by Christopher Shawn Cole, who was hauling materials for Highways, Inc. McClure sued Cole and Highways, Inc., alleging Cole was an employee and seeking damages based on negligence and respondeat superior. The trial court granted summary judgment to Highways, Inc., finding Cole to be an independent contractor. McClure appealed, arguing there were disputed material facts regarding the employment relationship. The Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that the evidence supported Cole's status as an independent contractor, thereby absolving Highways, Inc. of vicarious liability for his alleged negligence.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentIndependent ContractorVicarious LiabilityNegligenceAppellate ReviewTort LawEmployer-Employee RelationshipTruck AccidentAgency Law
References
28
Case No. 2016-08-0935
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 14, 2017

Coles, Giles v, YRC, Inc.

Giles Cole, a truck driver for YRC, Inc., filed an Expedited Hearing Request for additional medical and temporary disability benefits due to alleged injuries from a truck accident on September 23, 2015. He claimed head, back, and leg injuries. YRC contended he failed to establish the need for further treatment related to the injury and failed to establish entitlement to temporary disability benefits. The court found that Mr. Cole did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he is likely to prevail on the merits, specifically lacking expert medical opinion connecting his alleged injuries to the need for further medical treatment or his inability to work. Dr. Randolph, the authorized physician, had released him at maximum medical improvement, stating his complaints were not accident-related. Therefore, the court denied his request for further medical and temporary disability benefits at this time, but allowed him to contact YRC for a follow-up with Dr. Randolph.

Truck AccidentHead InjuryBack InjuryLeg InjuryMedical Benefits DenialTemporary Disability Benefits DenialCausation DisputeMedical OpinionAuthorized Treating PhysicianMaximum Medical Improvement
References
4
Case No. 14-12-00531-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 12, 2013

Denise Zimmerman v. Dr. Leslie Farias, D.D.S., P.A. F/K/A Dr. Leslie Farias, D.D.S., P.C. and Leslie Farias, Individually

Denise Zimmerman, a dental hygienist, sued Dr. Leslie Farias, D.D.S., P.A., and Leslie Farias individually for negligence after breaking her hip in a workplace fall due to alleged tripping hazards from computer cords. Neither Farias nor her Professional Association subscribed to Texas workers’ compensation insurance. Zimmerman's claims included unsafe working environment and an attempt to pierce the corporate veil against Farias. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the appellees. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that Zimmerman did not provide sufficient evidence to support her claims of sham to perpetrate fraud or an unreasonable risk of harm in her premises liability claim.

Workplace personal injurySummary judgmentNegligencePremises liabilityCorporate veil piercingAlter egoDental office accidentAppellate reviewTexas lawNo-evidence summary judgment
References
36
Case No. 2021-08-0425
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 28, 2022

Cole, Mason v. R & L Carriers

Employee Mason Cole sought medical and temporary disability benefits for a low-back injury sustained when his forklift ran off the dock. The employer, R&L Carriers, contested benefits, citing Mr. Cole's alleged noncompliance with treatment and lack of medical proof of causation, noting his termination for violating company attendance policy. The Court found Mr. Cole likely to prevail on his claim for medical benefits, concluding that past noncompliance was not clearly established and an MRI ordered by the authorized physician was never authorized by R&L. However, the Court denied temporary disability benefits at this time, as Mr. Cole was never taken completely off work by a physician and provided no medical proof of continued restrictions after his employment termination.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityLow Back InjuryForklift AccidentNoncomplianceCausationDegenerative Disc DiseaseMRI
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

50 Lefferts LLC v. Cole

This case involves a holdover proceeding initiated by a petitioner landlord against Shaniquca Cole, who claims succession rights to a rent-stabilized apartment after the death of the tenant of record, Thelma Williams, on June 10, 2013. Cole asserts she was a member of Williams' immediate family and that the apartment was their primary residence for two years prior to Williams' death. The core issue is the admissibility of Williams' hospital records, offered by the petitioner, which contain statements from which adverse inferences about Cole's residency could be drawn. Respondent objected to these records as hearsay, but the court, referencing relevant case law, ruled that discharge planning statements within hospital records are admissible as part of a patient's treatment. The court denied the respondent's motion to bar the evidence, emphasizing that admissibility does not equate to probative weight.

Holdover proceedingSuccession rightsRent stabilizationHospital recordsHearsay exceptionBusiness recordsDischarge planMedical evidencePrimary residenceTenant rights
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 2,768 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