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

Ben Bolt-Palito Blanco Consolidated Independent School District v. Texas Political Subdivisions Property/Casualty Joint Self-Insurance Fund

This case addresses an insurance coverage dispute between Ben Bolt-Palito Blanco Consolidated Independent School District (Ben Bolt) and the Texas Political Subdivisions Property/Casualty Joint Self-Insurance Fund (the Fund). Ben Bolt sued the Fund after a claim for extensive water and mold damage was denied, leading the Fund to assert governmental immunity. The Supreme Court of Texas determined that the Fund is a distinct governmental unit, thereby entitled to governmental immunity. However, the Court concluded that Section 271.152 of the Local Government Code provides a clear and unambiguous statutory waiver of the Fund’s immunity from suit for breach of contract claims in this context. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

Governmental ImmunityInsurance CoverageSelf-Insurance FundPolitical SubdivisionsInterlocal Cooperation ActBreach of ContractStatutory WaiverTrial Court JurisdictionDe Novo ReviewTexas Law
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 08, 2006

Texas Ass'n of School Boards Risk Management Fund v. Benavides Independent School District

The Texas Association of School Boards Risk Management Fund appealed the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction concerning claims brought by the Benavides Independent School District. The School District had sued for breach of contract, torts (DTPA, breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, fiduciary duties, negligence, gross negligence), and a declaratory action. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the plea to the jurisdiction for contractual claims, citing a waiver of immunity under Chapter 271 of the Texas Local Government Code, as supported by Ben Bolt-Palito Blanco. However, the court reversed the trial court's order regarding the tort claims, ruling that governmental immunity from suit had not been waived for these claims, thereby dismissing them for lack of jurisdiction. The court also held that governmental immunity exists between political subdivisions unless expressly waived.

Governmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityPlea to JurisdictionContract ClaimsTort ClaimsInterlocal Cooperation ActLocal Government CodeWaiver of ImmunityPolitical SubdivisionsSchool District
References
12
Case No. 06-04-00023-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 23, 2004

in Re: Randy E. Williams

Seven cities sued Texarkana, d/b/a Texarkana Water Utilities, for contract and tort claims related to water supply. Texarkana invoked governmental immunity, which the trial court denied. The appellate court distinguished between governmental and proprietary functions for immunity. It held that governmental immunity bars tort claims arising from water supply, which is a governmental function under the Texas Tort Claims Act. However, the court found that Texarkana's governmental immunity from suit was waived for contract claims due to the "plead and be impleaded" language in the Texas Local Government Code Section 51.075, interpreting it synonymously with "sue and be sued" based on Supreme Court precedent. Therefore, the court affirmed the trial court's decision on contract claims and reversed and dismissed the tort claims.

Governmental ImmunityContract LawTort ClaimsMunicipal LiabilityWaiver of ImmunityWater UtilitiesPolitical SubdivisionsStatutory InterpretationTexas LawAppellate Review
References
48
Case No. 05-18-00239-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 2019

Barbara Stegall, Individually, and on Behalf of the Estate of Joe Stegall v. TML Multistate Intergovernmental Employee Benefits Pool, Inc., and UMR, Inc.

This dissenting opinion argues against the majority's conclusion that TML, an intergovernmental self-insurance risk pool, and its third-party administrator, UMR, are governmental entities entitled to immunity from Barbara Stegall's tort claims. Justice Partida-Kipness contends that the 'governmental–proprietary distinction,' typically applied to municipalities, should extend to TML and UMR because they perform both governmental and proprietary functions. The dissent asserts that the appellees' actions related to adjusting Mr. Stegall's insurance claim, such as denying chemotherapy and withholding coverage authorizations, constituted proprietary functions, not governmental ones. Consequently, the dissenting justice believes TML and UMR should not be immune from tort claims arising from these actions and would reverse the granting of the appellees’ pleas to the jurisdiction.

Governmental ImmunityProprietary FunctionsIntergovernmental Risk PoolTort ClaimsSovereign ImmunityTexas LawMunicipalitiesClaims AdjustmentThird-Party AdministratorImmunity Waiver
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

City of Mexia v. Tooke

The City of Mexia contracted with J.E. Tooke and Sons for curbside collection, but later terminated the agreement citing budgetary constraints. Tooke sued the City for breach of contract, and the trial court denied the City's plea to jurisdiction and ruled in favor of Tooke. On appeal, the central question was whether section 51.075 of the Texas Local Government Code waives sovereign immunity for home-rule municipalities. The appellate court examined the statutory language and Supreme Court precedents on immunity waiver, concluding that the 'plead and be impleaded' language does not constitute a clear and unambiguous waiver. Furthermore, the court rejected arguments that the City waived immunity through partial performance or by acting in a proprietary capacity, as solid waste removal is a governmental function. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.

Sovereign ImmunityHome-Rule MunicipalitiesWaiver of ImmunityBreach of ContractTexas Local Government CodeGovernmental FunctionsProprietary FunctionsPlea to JurisdictionAppellate ReviewStatutory Interpretation
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

City of La Porte v. Prince

Justice Vance concurs with the award of actual damages but dissents from the majority's decision to affirm exemplary damages against the City of La Porte, arguing a lack of clear governmental immunity waiver. The opinion emphasizes the distinction between governmental and proprietary municipal functions, noting that the Texas Tort Claims Act, which governs governmental functions, does not authorize recovery of exemplary damages. Vance cites various legal precedents and statutory provisions, including the workers' compensation statute, to support the argument that no specific and express waiver for exemplary damages exists for governmental functions, particularly in cases involving city employment and workers' compensation claims. The dissent concludes that the judgment should be reformed to eliminate exemplary damages.

Governmental ImmunityExemplary DamagesTort Claims ActWorkers' CompensationMunicipal LiabilitySovereign ImmunityGovernmental FunctionsProprietary FunctionsWrongful DischargeTexas Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2004

City of Texarkana v. Cities of New Boston

Seven cities initiated a lawsuit against the City of Texarkana, operating as Texarkana Water Utilities, asserting both contract and tort claims stemming from their water supply relationship. Texarkana invoked governmental immunity, which the trial court denied. On appeal, the court affirmed that governmental immunity does not shield Texarkana from contract claims, citing a legislative waiver derived from the "plead and be impleaded" language in the Texas Local Government Code. However, the court reversed the trial court's decision regarding the tort claims, ruling that these claims are barred by governmental immunity because providing water services falls under Texarkana's governmental functions as defined by the Texas Tort Claims Act. Consequently, the contract claims were left pending, and the tort claims were dismissed.

Governmental ImmunityMunicipalitiesContract LawTort LawWaiver of ImmunityStatutory InterpretationTexas Local Government CodeWater UtilitiesPolitical SubdivisionsHome-Rule Municipalities
References
49
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

City of Midlothian v. Black

Letha Black's property experienced increased water flow and damage after the City of Midlothian approved a residential subdivision's drainage detention pond. Black sued Midlothian, alleging a violation of the Texas Water Code and an inverse condemnation claim. Midlothian filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting governmental immunity. The appellate court held that the Legislature had not clearly and unambiguously waived Midlothian's immunity for the Water Code claim. Furthermore, the court found Black failed to sufficiently plead a valid inverse condemnation claim by not alleging that Midlothian knew the damage was substantially certain to occur. Consequently, the court reversed the trial court's denial of Midlothian's plea to the jurisdiction and remanded the case with instructions to dismiss Black's suit against Midlothian.

Governmental ImmunityInverse CondemnationWater Code ViolationPlea to the JurisdictionWaiver of ImmunitySurface Water DiversionProperty DamageTexas Constitution Article I Section 17Municipal ImmunityStatutory Interpretation
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

City of Dallas v. Jill Herz, P.C.

The City of Dallas appealed a trial court's denial of its plea to the jurisdiction against Jill Herz, P.C.'s claim for attorney's fees under the Texas Labor Code. Herz represented Clifford Beamon, a firefighter who received worker's compensation benefits from the City and later secured a third-party settlement. Herz sought attorney's fees from the City's reimbursement amount, but the City asserted governmental immunity. The appellate court reviewed the plea de novo and concluded that the Texas Labor Code, specifically section 417.003, does not contain a clear and unambiguous waiver of sovereign immunity for such claims against municipalities acting as self-insurers. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's order, granted the City's plea to the jurisdiction, and remanded the cause.

Governmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityAttorney's FeesWorker's CompensationTexas Labor CodePlea to the JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealReimbursementSelf-Insured MunicipalityStatutory Interpretation
References
16
Case No. 06 Civ. 4880(PKC)
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2009

Swarna v. Al-Awadi

Plaintiff Swarna Vishranthamma sued her former employers, Badar Al-Awadi and Halal Muhammad Al-Shaitan (Individual Defendants), and the State of Kuwait for slavery and slavery-like practices under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) and for labor law violations. The Individual Defendants claimed diplomatic immunity, and Kuwait claimed sovereign immunity. The court ruled that the Individual Defendants' alleged actions were private acts, not official diplomatic functions, thus denying them residual diplomatic immunity for both ATCA and labor law claims. Conversely, Kuwait was granted sovereign immunity from the labor law claims, as it was not the direct employer, and its financial support to the diplomat was deemed a sovereign act. Kuwait also retained immunity from the ATCA claims, as the diplomat's tortious acts were outside the scope of employment, and claims of ratification/aiding and abetting involved discretionary governmental functions. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for a default judgment against the Individual Defendants but denied it against the State of Kuwait, dismissing all claims against Kuwait for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Diplomatic ImmunitySovereign ImmunityAlien Tort Claims ActForced LaborInvoluntary ServitudeHuman TraffickingSexual SlaveryDefault JudgmentEmployment LawVicarious Liability
References
59
Showing 1-10 of 1,795 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