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. 14-05-01068-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 12, 2007

Willie Choice v. Richard A. Gibbs and Mary C. Edwards

This negligence case involves an appeal by contractor William Choice against homeowners Richard A. Gibbs and Mary C. Edwards. Choice sued after allegedly suffering an electrocution and subsequent heart attack while installing a bathtub at their residence, claiming negligence due to exposed electrical wires. The trial court granted the homeowners' no-evidence motion for summary judgment, citing a lack of causation evidence. However, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals reversed this decision, finding that the combination of Choice's lay testimony regarding the immediate onset of heart attack symptoms post-electrocution and Dr. Louis Train's expert affidavit, which stated the electrocution caused the heart attack, raised a genuine issue of material fact concerning causation. The case was therefore remanded for further proceedings.

NegligencePremises LiabilitySummary JudgmentCausationExpert TestimonyHeart AttackElectrocutionWorkers' Compensation PrecedentReversed and RemandedAppellate Court
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Uhler v. A & P

Claimant suffered electrocution injuries in 1981, initially affecting his left hand and later manifesting as brain trauma. In 1989, the Workers' Compensation Board reopened the case, finding that the Statute of Limitations was tolled due to the claimant's mental incompetency, which stemmed from the electrocution. The Board awarded workers' compensation benefits for the brain trauma and absolved the Special Fund for Reopened Cases from liability. The employer appealed, but the court affirmed the Board's findings, citing substantial evidence of mental incompetence, the tolling of the Statute of Limitations, and the claimant's total disability. The court also agreed that Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a was inapplicable.

Mental IncompetencyStatute of LimitationsBrain TraumaElectrocution InjuryTotal DisabilityMedical Expert TestimonyWorkers' Compensation BenefitsSpecial Fund LiabilityPersonality DisorderMemory Loss
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Choice v. Gibbs

William Choice, a contractor, filed a negligence lawsuit against homeowners Richard A. Gibbs and Mary C. Edwards, alleging he was electrocuted and suffered a heart attack while working at their residence. The homeowners sought a no-evidence summary judgment, contending a lack of proof for causation. The trial court granted their motion, but on appeal, the court reversed and remanded the case. The appellate court determined that Choice had presented sufficient evidence, including his own testimony of immediate symptoms and an expert's affidavit, to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the electrocution caused his heart attack, referencing the Kneten precedent. Furthermore, the court found a genuine issue of material fact concerning the foreseeability of the alleged negligence causing Choice's injuries.

NegligencePremises LiabilityElectrocutionHeart AttackCausationSummary JudgmentExpert TestimonyMedical ProbabilityAppellate ReviewTexas Law
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wendell v. Central Power and Light Co.

This case involves an appeal from a take-nothing judgment in a wrongful death action. The appellants, wife and children of the deceased, sued Central Power and Light Company after the deceased was electrocuted by a power line. The jury found all liability issues against the appellants. On appeal, the appellants argued the trial court erred in denying a trial amendment, refusing to submit certain special issues, and excluding evidence. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no abuse of discretion by the trial court.

wrongful deathnegligenceelectrocutionpower line safetytrial amendmentappellate procedureabuse of discretionspecial issuesevidence exclusionstandard of care
References
17
Case No. ADJ1167245
Regular
Jun 03, 2013

RONALD THOMPSON vs. BLOCKA CONSTRUCTION, INC., SEABRIGHT INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend an award concerning an electrocution injury. The Board modified the award to have the EDD lien for duplicative payments deducted from the applicant's permanent disability award, rather than reimbursed separately by the defendant, and rescinded the award of interest to EDD. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings of 100% permanent disability without apportionment and the exclusion of sub rosa video evidence. The matter was returned to the WCJ to recalculate the commutation of the award to incorporate the EDD lien payment.

Electrocution injuryPermanent disabilityApportionmentSub rosa videoEDD lienCommutationDuplicative paymentsVocational rehabilitationMedical evidenceCardiac disability
References
0
Case No. ADJ12315169
Regular
Sep 10, 2019

Gregory Williams vs. Redwood Electric Group, Travelers Property Casualty Company of America

The Appeals Board affirmed an Arbitrator's finding that an electrician's injuries, potentially from electrocution, arose out of employment. Despite the unwitnessed nature of the injury and lack of direct evidence on the precise cause, the Board applied the *Clemmens* doctrine, creating a presumption that the injury occurred in the course of employment when the employee is placed at the location by the employer. Circumstantial evidence, including entry and exit wounds and the active construction site environment, supported the industrial nature of the injury. The defendant's arguments regarding the neutral risk doctrine, burden of proof, and denial of due process were found unpersuasive or waived.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRedwood Electric GroupTravelers Property Casualty Company of AmericaJourneyman Electricianupper and lower extremitiesbody systemskinkidneysheartbrain
References
2
Case No. M2002-01620-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 2003

Susan Taylor v. Square D Company

Disobeying the direct orders of his supervisor, an electrician began work on a substation without following the proper safety procedures. He was electrocuted and perished almost instantly. His widow, Susan Taylor, brought suit against the manufacturer of the substation, Square D Company, alleging negligence and defective design. The trial court granted summary judgment for the manufacturer, finding the electrician's negligence greater. The appellate court affirmed the decision, concluding that the electrician's fault was clearly more than fifty percent, thus barring recovery, despite the alleged defective design arguments made by the plaintiff's expert.

ElectrocutionSubstation AccidentNegligenceDefective DesignProduct LiabilitySummary JudgmentComparative FaultElectrical SafetyLockout TagoutWorkplace Accident
References
27
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cresencio Bastida v. Abel's Mobile Home Service, Inc.

Cresencio Bastida appealed a trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Richard Aznaran on claims of negligence, gross negligence, and malice. Bastida was electrocuted while working to install a mobile home on Aznaran's ranch. The appellate court found a genuine issue of material fact regarding Aznaran's supervisory control over Bastida's work, which could establish a duty of care for both negligent activity and premises defect claims. Consequently, the summary judgment on the negligence, gross negligence, and malice claims was reversed, and those claims were remanded for further proceedings, while the summary judgment on other related claims was affirmed.

NegligenceGross NegligenceMaliceSummary JudgmentPremises LiabilityIndependent ContractorDuty of CareSupervisory ControlFact IssueAppellate Review
References
56
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Di Piazza v. George Campbell Painting Co.

The case involves the appeal of a Workers' Compensation Board decision concerning a decedent's widow. The decedent sustained fatal injuries from electrocution while working for the employer. The Board initially awarded death benefits, temporary total disability, and facial disfigurement, but later rescinded the disability award, upholding the disfigurement. The employer appealed, arguing the disfigurement award was improper without a permanent partial disability finding. The court reversed the Board's decision, finding that the evidence of grave injuries supported total, not partial, disability, making the disfigurement award irrational. The matter was remitted for further proceedings consistent with the court's decision.

Workers' CompensationFacial DisfigurementTemporary Total DisabilityDeath BenefitsConcurrent AwardsAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationMedical EvidenceAccidentElectrocution
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n v. Clapper

This worker's compensation death case involves William Clapper, an employee of Chemical Refining Corporation, who died as a welder. The central issue was whether his death on December 29, 1976, was due to electrocution. The jury found in favor of the plaintiffs, concluding that Clapper received an injury in the course of his employment which was a producing cause of his death. The defendant appealed, challenging the submission of special issues, the refusal of requested issues, and the award of lump sum attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings and no abuse of discretion in the attorney's fees award.

Electrocution DeathCircumstantial EvidenceExpert Witness TestimonyJury FindingsAppellate ReviewProducing CauseCourse of EmploymentAttorney's FeesLump Sum AwardMedical Examiner Opinion
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 52 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