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

Hand v. Stevens Transport, Inc. Employee Benefit Plan

Jean and Howard Hand appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment which dismissed their claims for health care benefits against the Stevens Transport, Inc. Employee Benefit Plan as time-barred. The Hands argued that the Plan's failure to comply with ERISA's notification requirements should invalidate or toll the contractual limitations period. The appellate court found that while the Plan's notice was non-compliant, it still provided reasonable notice of partial denial, and the Hands failed to exercise due diligence. The court concluded that the twenty-seven month contractual limitations period was reasonable and was not tolled by the Plan's ERISA non-compliance or the pursuit of administrative remedies. Therefore, the Hands' claims were barred, and the trial court's judgment was affirmed.

ERISAHealth Insurance BenefitsContractual Limitations PeriodStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentDenial of BenefitsEquitable TollingAdministrative RemediesNotice RequirementsEmployee Benefit Plan
References
19
Case No. 14-19-00539-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2020

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. v. Lowery Masonry, LLC

Appellant Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. (HWC) appealed a summary judgment that denied it recovery from Appellee Lowery Masonry, LLC, on a guaranty agreement. Lowery's president had signed a "Letter of Guarantee" to ensure prompt medical treatment for an injured employee, Sandro Tovar, and to pay HWC's usual and customary fees. Lowery later argued an exception applied because it had workers' compensation insurance with Texas Mutual Insurance Company, leading the trial court to grant summary judgment. The appellate court determined that Lowery's interpretation of the exception was unreasonable as it would render the phrase "additional payment" meaningless within the contract. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings, concluding that Lowery had not conclusively established its entitlement to summary judgment.

Contract LawGuaranty AgreementSummary JudgmentWorker's Compensation InsuranceMedical BillingAppellate ReviewContract InterpretationTexas LawHarris CountyFourteenth Court of Appeals
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. v. SGS Control Services, Inc.

Charles Reagan was injured at work and treated by Hand & Wrist Center. SGS North America, his employer, signed a "Letter of Guarantee" promising to pay for treatment if workers' compensation insurance didn't cover it. SGS failed to pay, leading Hand & Wrist to sue for breach of contract. SGS filed a plea to the jurisdiction, arguing Hand & Wrist failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the Workers' Compensation Act. The trial court granted the plea, and Hand & Wrist appealed, contending SGS did not invoke its workers' compensation coverage and that exclusive remedies provisions do not apply to healthcare providers. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that SGS invoked its workers' compensation coverage when it obtained it, and Hand & Wrist was required to exhaust administrative remedies with the Texas Department of Insurance-Workers’ Compensation Division before filing suit, as the Division has exclusive jurisdiction over medical fee disputes.

Workers' CompensationAdministrative RemediesSubject Matter JurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionBreach of ContractHealthcare Provider ReimbursementExclusive RemediesTexas Labor CodeMedical Fee DisputeAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. 01-12-00216-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 2014

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. and SCA Houston Hospital for Specialized Surgery L.P. v. Maintenance Supply Headquarters, LP

Appellants Hand & Wrist Center, P.A. and SCA Houston Hospital for Specialized Surgery, L.P. appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Maintenance Supply Headquarters, L.P., concerning a breach of contract claim. The dispute arose from a "Letter of Guarantee" signed by Maintenance Supply for medical services provided to an injured employee, Daniel Contreras, whose workers' compensation claim was denied. Maintenance Supply argued estoppel and the applicability of the Labor Code's exclusive remedies provision. The Court of Appeals found the estoppel defense inapplicable and, crucially, ruled that Labor Code section 408.001(a)'s exclusive remedies provision applies only to employees and their beneficiaries, not to health care providers. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Breach of contractSummary judgmentWorkers' compensationExclusive remedyHealth care providersStatutory interpretationTexas Labor CodeEstoppelLetter of GuaranteeAppellate review
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United Way of San Antonio, Inc. v. Helping Hands Lifeline Foundation, Inc.

This is a dissenting opinion by Justice Antonio G. Cantu regarding a majority's decision on a motion for rehearing. The primary case involved claims of slander, libel, and business disparagement brought by Helping Hands Lifeline Foundation and Ruth Mahl against United Way of San Antonio and Bexar County, Inc. and Dick Brown. The dissent argues that the majority improperly reversed and remanded on the business disparagement issue, believing that Helping Hands failed to preserve this complaint for appellate review due to a lack of specific and timely objections to expert testimony at trial. Justice Cantu details the trial court's proceedings regarding the expert witness, Dean Barbara Aldave, who testified that the statements in question were not defamatory. The dissent contends that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Aldave's testimony and that Helping Hands waived its objections, suggesting the judgment should have been reformed and otherwise affirmed.

DefamationSlanderLibelBusiness DisparagementExpert TestimonyAdmissibility of EvidencePreservation of ErrorMotion for RehearingDissenting OpinionTrial Procedure
References
36
Case No. 2020-08-0199
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2026

HANDS, DERRICK v. FRESENIUS MEDICAL CARE HOLDINGS, INC

Derrick Hands, an employee, sought medical and permanent disability benefits for knee and back injuries sustained in a work fall on November 12, 2018. The Court found his knee and back injuries arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of his employment, despite conflicting medical opinions regarding the back injury's causation. While Mr. Hands claimed permanent total disability, the Court determined he was only partially disabled due to a lack of vocational testimony and medical restrictions. Consequently, the Court denied permanent total disability but granted permanent partial disability benefits for both injuries, along with increased benefits. The employer, Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc., was also ordered to cover unauthorized medical bills and continue providing treatment with Dr. Hauser for the back and Dr. Wolf for the knee.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityBack Injury CausationKnee InjuryMedical Treatment AuthorizationImpairment RatingPreexisting Condition AggravationConflicting Medical OpinionsLumbar FusionEmployee Testimony Credibility
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Feliciano v. New York City Health & Hospitals Co.

Claimant sought workers' compensation benefits for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge ruled the left hand claim time-barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 28 and established August 28, 2006, as the disability date for the right hand. On appeal, the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the right hand's disability date but, on its own motion, set December 2003 as the disability date for the left hand, thereby confirming the left hand claim was untimely. The claimant appealed, arguing against two disability dates for a single claim. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported treating the hand injuries as discrete occupational diseases with separate disablement dates and upheld the time-bar for the left hand claim.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeTime-barred ClaimDate of DisablementBilateral InjuriesAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardJudicial ReviewStatute of Limitations
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Amalgamated Service & Allied Industries Joint Board v. Supreme Hand Laundry, Inc.

Plaintiffs, a joint board representing workers, sued several laundry businesses for violations of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, alleging that the defendants constituted a single employer and failed to provide proper notice of termination. The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment against the 'Karten defendants' (Supreme Hand Laundry, Inc. and related entities) due to their failure to secure legal representation after their original counsel was disqualified. The court also denied defendant 2350 Fifth Avenue Corp.'s belated motion to amend its answer to assert a 'good faith' defense under the WARN Act, citing undue delay, potential prejudice to plaintiffs, and futility. Final judgment was entered against the Karten defendants for over $600,000, including attorneys' fees, and other defendants were dismissed by agreement or order.

WARN ActDefault JudgmentRule 54(b) CertificationGood Faith DefenseCorporate VeilAttorney DisqualificationStatutory DamagesBack PayMass LayoffPlant Closing
References
9
Case No. ADJ2135528 (VNO 0550980)
Regular
May 22, 2015

NUREN KARTAL vs. THREE HANDS CORPORATION, OAK RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendants, Three Hands Corporation and Oak River Insurance Company. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has dismissed the petition. This dismissal is based on the WCJ's report, which found the petition moot because the WCJ issued a corrected award superseding the original one. Therefore, the WCAB adopted the WCJ's reasoning and dismissed the reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportmootSecond Amended Supplemental FindingsFirst Amended Joint FindingsApplicantDefendantInsurance CompanyAdministrative Law Judge
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

A. C. Lawrence Leather Co. v. Britt

This workmen's compensation case concerns Yoss Britt, an employee of A. C. Lawrence Leather Company, who developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome from heavy manual labor. Britt underwent surgeries on both hands by Dr. Sidney L. Wallace in 1962 and 1965. Initially, Britt did not file a claim for his left hand disability, believing it was arthritis, despite being informed of 'carpal tendon' in 1962. Following a recurrence of symptoms in his right hand in 1965, he filed a suit. The trial court awarded total permanent disability and benefits for both hands. However, the appellate court modified the judgment, disallowing benefits for the left hand due to Britt's failure to provide timely notice and the operation of the statute of limitations, finding he had sufficient knowledge of a compensable injury in 1962. The court affirmed the award of permanent partial disability benefits for the right hand, along with associated temporary total disability and medical expenses.

Carpal Tunnel SyndromeOccupational DiseaseAccidental InjuryWorkmen's CompensationStatute of LimitationsNotice RequirementPermanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityMedical ExpensesOrthopedic Surgery
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 618 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