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. 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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Charles Manbeck v. Austin Independent School District

In this workers’ compensation case, the Austin Independent School District (AISD), a self-insured governmental entity, sought to avoid an award of attorney fees granted to its injured employee, Charles Manbeck, by asserting governmental immunity. The case involved disputes over the extent of Manbeck’s compensable injury and proceeded through administrative and judicial review. AISD filed a nonsuit in the trial court, leaving only Manbeck's counterclaim for fees. On appeal, AISD raised the defense of governmental immunity for the first time. The Supreme Court concluded that AISD could assert governmental immunity on appeal and held that the Political Subdivisions Law does not clearly and unambiguously waive governmental immunity against Manbeck’s claim for attorney fees. Furthermore, the Court found that AISD's litigation conduct did not result in a loss of its immunity. The court partially reversed and partially affirmed the lower court's judgment regarding attorney fees.

Governmental ImmunityAttorney FeesWorkers' CompensationTexas Labor CodePolitical Subdivisions LawSovereign ImmunityWaiver of ImmunityJudicial ReviewSelf-Insured EntityAppellate Procedure
References
9
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. 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
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. 06-04-00023-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 23, 2004

City of Texarkana, Texas, D/B/A Texarkana Water Utilities v. Cities of New Boston, Hooks, DeKalb, Wake Village, Maud, Avery, and Annona, Texas

The City of Texarkana, operating as Texarkana Water Utilities, appealed a trial court's decision regarding governmental immunity in a lawsuit brought by seven other cities. These cities had sued Texarkana for various contract and tort claims related to water supply. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's ruling that governmental immunity does not bar the contract claims, allowing them to proceed. However, the court reversed the trial court's decision on the tort claims, holding that governmental immunity does apply to and bars these claims, leading to their dismissal. The court delved into the interpretation of Section 51.075 of the Texas Local Government Code, concluding that the phrase 'plead and be impleaded' acts as an unambiguous legislative waiver of immunity from suit for contract claims for home-rule municipalities.

Governmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityContract LawTort LawMunicipal LawWater UtilitiesTexas CourtsAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationWaiver of Immunity
References
46
Case No. 14-10-01098-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 16, 2011

the City of Houston v. Joslyn M. Johnson, Individually and as for the Estate of Rodney Johnson

Joslyn Johnson sued the City of Houston after her husband, a Houston police officer, was killed in the line of duty. She alleged the City was grossly negligent for failing to implement policies to safeguard officers during traffic stops and that the City’s immunity from suit for such claims violated the equal-protection clause of the state constitution. The trial court denied the City's pleas to the jurisdiction regarding these claims. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the City is immune from suit for gross negligence and exemplary damages. The court also found Joslyn's equal-protection claim invalid, stating that governmental immunity prevents suits against governmental entities even if they could be brought against private parties, and the absence of a waiver of immunity is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose. The case was remanded with directions to sever and dismiss with prejudice Joslyn’s allegations of gross negligence and violations of the state constitutional guarantee of equal protection.

Governmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityGross NegligenceEqual ProtectionTexas Tort Claims ActWorkers' Compensation ActExemplary DamagesPlea to the JurisdictionPolice ProtectionMunicipal Liability
References
26
Showing 1-10 of 1,290 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