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. 01-03-00419-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 28, 2004

Melquiades Flores, Sr., and Mary Flores, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Their Son, Melquiades Flores, Jr. v. North America Technologies Group, Inc., Tietek, Inc And Skillmaster, Inc.

Melquiades Flores, Sr. and Mary Flores (the Floreses) appealed a summary judgment rendered in favor of TieTek, Inc. (and its parent company North American Technologies Group, Inc.) and Skillmaster Staffing Services, Inc. The Floreses filed a wrongful death action after their son, Mike Flores, sustained fatal injuries while working at TieTek's facility, having been assigned there by Skillmaster, a temporary employment agency. The central issue on appeal was whether TieTek qualified as Mike Flores's employer, which would entitle TieTek to the exclusive remedy provision of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act (TWCA). The trial court granted summary judgment for both defendants. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the right-to-control test is still applicable for determining employer status under the TWCA and that TieTek exercised sufficient control over Mike Flores's work details to be considered a borrowed servant employer, thus qualifying for the exclusive remedy provision.

Wrongful DeathWorkers' Compensation ActExclusive RemedyEmployer StatusBorrowed Servant DoctrineRight-to-Control TestSummary Judgment AppealTemporary Employment AgencyCo-employer LiabilityTexas Labor Code
References
16
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. 2017-278 Q C
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 08, 2019

Flores v. A & A Family Beverage, Inc.

The Appellate Term, Second Department, affirmed an order denying the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff Carlos Flores sought recovery for injuries sustained while unloading a truck owned by A & A Family Beverage, Inc. Defendants argued that Flores's sole remedy was workers' compensation benefits. The Civil Court found triable issues of fact regarding whether an employer-employee relationship existed between Flores and A & A, which would determine if workers' compensation was the exclusive remedy. The appellate court concurred, noting that the nature and extent of A & A's control over Flores needed to be determined by the trier of fact, and also clarified that Flores was not an employee of A & A under Workers' Compensation Law § 2 (4) as he was not a driver.

workers' compensationemployer-employee disputesummary judgment denialappellate reviewlabor lawpersonal injury claimexclusive remedytrucking accidentfactual disputerespondent vs appellant
References
1
Case No. 14-05-00346-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 2006

Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania v. Isaac Flores

Isaac Flores sustained a neck injury in February 1993 while employed, and his employer was insured by the Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (ICSP). Flores sought workers' compensation for a recommended surgery by Dr. Mark McDonnell, but his claim was denied by the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission and its Appeals Panel. Flores then filed a petition in the trial court, leading to a default judgment in his favor on August 16, 2004, which was finalized on December 7, 2004, reversing the Appeals Panel's decision. ICSP filed a restricted appeal, alleging error on the face of the record and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction due to a late filing of Flores's petition. The appellate court found no error apparent on the face of the record concerning the forty-day filing deadline or the necessity of attaching the Appeals Panel's decision to Flores's petition, thereby affirming the trial court's judgment.

Workers' CompensationDefault JudgmentRestricted AppealJurisdictional IssueAppeals Panel DecisionTrial Court JurisdictionFiling DeadlineMedical NecessityOrthopedic Surgeon TestimonyError Apparent on Record
References
8
Case No. 08-18-00151-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2019

Texas Tech University Health Sciences El Paso v. Loretta K. Flores

Loretta K. Flores filed an age discrimination lawsuit against Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center-El Paso (TTUHSC-EP) after she was reclassified, demoted, and experienced a salary reduction. Flores, born in 1956, had a long employment history with Texas Tech. The changes occurred after Dr. Richard Lange became president, leading to Flores's duties being shifted to a younger employee and her reclassification from Director to Executive Associate. The trial court denied TTUHSC-EP's plea to the jurisdiction, which sought to dismiss the case. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that Flores presented sufficient evidence to raise genuine issues of material fact regarding her prima facie case of age discrimination and the pretextual nature of Texas Tech's stated non-discriminatory reasons for its actions. This allows her age discrimination suit to proceed.

Age DiscriminationEmployment LawPlea to JurisdictionPrima Facie CaseCircumstantial EvidencePretextMcDonnell Douglas FrameworkSummary Judgment StandardTexas Labor CodeSovereign Immunity
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Flores v. NORTH AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC.

The Floreses appealed a summary judgment that favored TieTek and Skillmaster in a wrongful death suit concerning their son, Mike Flores. Mike Flores, initially employed by Skillmaster, sustained fatal injuries while working at TieTek's plastics manufacturing plant. The central legal question was whether TieTek qualified as Mike Flores's employer, which would limit the Floreses' remedy to workers' compensation benefits under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act (TWCA). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that TieTek was a 'borrowing employer' due to its day-to-day control over Mike Flores's work, thus making the TWCA's exclusive remedy provision applicable.

Wrongful DeathSummary JudgmentWorkers' CompensationExclusive RemedyBorrowed Servant DoctrineCo-employerRight-to-Control TestTemporary StaffingEmployer LiabilityTexas Law
References
21
Case No. 13-15-00024-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 06, 2015

Maria Zamarripa, as Temporary Guardian of the Estates of R. F. R. and R. J. R., Minors, and Olga Flores, as Temporary Administrator of the Estate of Yolanda Iris Flores v. Bay Area Health Care Group, Ltd. D/B/A Corpus Christi Medical Center, Hidalgo County EMS, and Hidalgo County Emergency Medical Service Foundation

This case involves an appeal by Maria Zamarripa and Olga Flores (Appellants) against Bay Area Health Care Group, Hidalgo County EMS, and Hidalgo County Emergency Medical Service Foundation (Appellees). The Appellants are challenging the trial court's orders that granted the Appellees' motions to dismiss. The core of the appeal centers on the qualifications of Nurse Spears as an expert witness and the sufficiency of expert reports regarding the standard of care, its breach, and causation in a medical malpractice claim involving Yolanda Iris Flores's injuries and death from placenta accreta and pre-term labor. Appellants argue that Nurse Spears is qualified, the expert reports adequately connect CCMC's alleged breach of care to the injuries, and alternatively, they are entitled to amend the reports. They pray for the reversal of the trial court's dismissal orders and a remand for further proceedings.

Medical MalpracticePlacenta AccretaPre-term LaborMedical NegligenceStandard of CareCausationExpert Witness QualificationsHospital LiabilityEmergency Medical Services (EMS)Wrongful Death
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Flores v. Coffield Warehouse Co.

Javier Flores, an employee of Coffield Warehouse Company, suffered severe injuries, including leg amputations, when he was struck by railcars while attempting to repair a conveyer belt on company premises. Flores sued Coffield and Southern Pacific Transportation Company, alleging liability under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). Southern Pacific was granted summary judgment, which Flores did not appeal. Coffield also moved for summary judgment, arguing it was not a "common carrier by railroad" under FELA and that Flores' claim was limited to workers' compensation benefits. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Coffield, concluding that Coffield, primarily a grain storage and warehousing business, did not meet the four criteria to be classified as a common carrier by railroad under FELA, and thus was not liable to Flores under the Act.

Federal Employers' Liability ActCommon Carrier by RailroadWorkers' Compensation ActSummary Judgment AffirmationPersonal Injury ClaimRailroad AccidentEmployer LiabilityInterstate CommerceGrain WarehousingEmployee Injury
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Borg-Warner Protective Services Corp. v. Flores

This legal opinion, a concurring and dissenting statement by Chief Justice Seerden, addresses the case of Amelia Flores against Borg-Warner, her former employer. Flores alleged sexual harassment and rape by her supervisor, Jimmy Gonzales, leading her to resign and claim constructive discharge. The majority opinion affirmed awards for Flores's damages based on this theory. However, Chief Justice Seerden dissents from this affirmation, arguing that Flores failed to present legally or factually sufficient evidence for constructive discharge. The dissent emphasizes that Borg-Warner took immediate, reasonable action by placing the supervisor on administrative leave, and Flores did not allow the employer sufficient time to implement a permanent solution before resigning.

Sexual HarassmentConstructive DischargeEmployment DiscriminationRapeHostile Work EnvironmentQuid Pro QuoTexas Labor CodeDamagesLost WagesPunitive Damages
References
22
Showing 1-10 of 2,872 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