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. 04-94-00571-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 1996

Matter of Mrr

Appellant M.R.R., Jr., a juvenile, was found to have engaged in delinquent conduct by committing capital murder and received a forty-year determinate sentence. The appellant appealed, alleging the trial court failed to provide the mandatory admonitions required by TEX.FAM.CODE ANN., Sec. 54.03(b) at the adjudication hearing. The Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio, sustained the appellant's point of error, holding that the omission of these admonitions constituted fundamental, reversible error that could not be waived by lack of objection or deemed harmless. The court rejected the State's arguments to abandon the fundamental error doctrine or apply a harmless error analysis. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for a new trial.

Juvenile LawDelinquent ConductCapital MurderAdjudication HearingFundamental ErrorDue ProcessTexas Family CodeAdmonitionsReversible ErrorAppellate Procedure
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Sorbello

This case involves an appeal by a defendant convicted of felony murder and robbery. The primary issue on appeal is the application of CPL 240.75, which allows for harmless error analysis in cases of Rosario rule violations, replacing the previous per se reversal rule. The court determined that CPL 240.75 applies retroactively to all appeals heard after its effective date. Finding that the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility that the non-disclosure of Rosario material materially contributed to the trial's outcome, the court deemed the error harmless. Additionally, the judgment was modified to mandate concurrent sentences for the murder and robbery convictions, as the robbery served as the predicate felony for the murder charge.

Criminal Procedure LawRosario RuleHarmless Error AnalysisStatutory RetroactivityFelony MurderRobbery Second DegreeSentence ConcurrencyAppellate Division DecisionDiscovery Rule ViolationWitness Impeachment
References
41
Case No. 03-95-00427-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 17, 1998

Roger Eugene Fain v. State

This is a dissenting opinion concerning Roger Eugene Fain's murder conviction. The central issue is whether the 277th Judicial District Court of Williamson County could constitutionally hold the trial in Smith County without a formal change of venue. The dissent argues this action violated Article V, Section 7 of the Texas Constitution, which requires proceedings at the county seat, thus rendering the judgment void. It asserts that this jurisdictional error cannot be waived or subject to harmless error analysis. The dissent opposes the majority's decision to affirm the conviction, which viewed the venue issue as a procedural mistake.

Criminal LawMurder ConvictionVenue ChangeJurisdictional DefectConstitutional ViolationTexas Constitution Article V Section 7District Court AuthorityAppellate ProcedureHarmless ErrorDissenting Opinion
References
53
Case No. 11-06-00146-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 05, 2009

Oscar Pena De La Paz v. State of Texas

Oscar Pena De La Paz was convicted of two counts of aggravated sexual assault and one count of injury to a child. His conviction was initially affirmed but then reversed and remanded by the Court of Criminal Appeals for a harm analysis regarding erroneously admitted hospital records. These records contained statements from the child victim to a social worker and nurse, implicating De La Paz. On remand, the Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, concluding that despite the error in admitting the records, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the strength of the State's overall case, De La Paz's suspicious behavior, and his questionable credibility. The court also rejected his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Criminal LawAppellate ReviewHarm AnalysisConfrontation ClauseChild AbuseSexual AssaultIneffective Assistance of CounselEvidence AdmissibilityTexas Court of AppealsRemand
References
8
Case No. W1999-00844-CCA-R3-DD
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 26, 2002

State v. McKinney

Timothy McKinney was convicted of premeditated first-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder. The jury imposed a death sentence for the first-degree murder, citing a prior violent felony as an aggravating circumstance, and a consecutive twelve-year sentence for attempted second-degree murder. The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences, addressing various legal challenges. The Court found no error in denying expert testimony on eyewitness identification, upheld the clarity of the jury's verdict form on aggravating circumstances, and confirmed the sufficiency of evidence for the prior violent felony. It also ruled that the trial court's limitation on defense counsel's closing argument during the sentencing phase was harmless error and that victim impact evidence was properly admitted. Finally, the Court concluded that the death sentence was neither arbitrary nor disproportionate through a comparative proportionality analysis, aligning it with similar cases where capital punishment was upheld.

First Degree MurderAttempted Second Degree MurderDeath SentenceAggravating CircumstancePrior Violent FelonyEyewitness IdentificationVictim Impact EvidenceProportionality ReviewDue ProcessConstitutional Rights
References
46
Case No. ADJ7622191 ADJ10153210 ADJ3319380 (SAC 0227891)(MF), ADJ4269417 (SAC 0286258)
Regular
Aug 05, 2019

CATHERINA DE LAY vs. CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for SUPERIOR NATIONAL, DIGNITY HEALTH, TRAVELERS

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision from July 19, 2019. The error resulted in the misidentification of adjudication numbers in the original decision. The Board is correcting this clerical error without granting reconsideration, as such errors can be amended at any time. The amended caption now accurately includes all relevant case numbers: ADJ7622191, ADJ10153210, ADJ3319380 (SAC 0227891)(MF), and ADJ4269417 (SAC 0286258).

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardclerical errorOpinion and DecisionReconsiderationadjudication numbersSuperior Nationalliquidationpermissibly self-insuredCIGADignity Health
References
0
Case No. ADJ9105445
Regular
Dec 01, 2009

CHARLES STUMPH vs. COUNTY OF ORANGE, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT

This case concerns a clerical error in a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) opinion. The error involved misidentifying a defendant in the initial sentence of a paragraph. The WCAB has issued an order correcting this clerical error to accurately reflect that the applicant, Charles Stumph, entered into a compromise and release agreement with the County of Orange Sheriff's Department. This correction was made without granting further reconsideration, as such errors can be amended at any time. The Board's original decision rescinded the administrative law judge's findings and approved the compromise and release agreement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardClerical ErrorReconsiderationLabor Code Section 132aFindings of Fact and OrderCompromise and ReleaseWCJWCAB Rule 10882Labor Code Section 5001Labor Code Section 5002
References
2
Case No. 12-02-00174-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 28, 2004

Jayanti Patel v. City of Everman, Tom Killebrew, and Metro Code Analysis, L.L.P.

Jayanti Patel appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the City of Everman and Tom Killebrew d/b/a Metro Code Analysis. Patel had sued the City and Killebrew for an unlawful taking of his properties without just compensation, procedural due process violations, trespass, and conversion, stemming from the demolition of his apartment buildings due to alleged code violations. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment regarding Patel's consent to the demolition of fifteen properties, his due process claim, and his trespass and conversion claims due to res judicata. However, the court reversed and remanded the summary judgment on Patel's takings claim concerning four specific properties (403 Lee Street, 410 Race Street, 405 King Street, and 403 King Street) where the defense of consent was not applicable and a fact issue existed regarding nuisance.

Property DemolitionInverse CondemnationSummary JudgmentTexas ConstitutionDue Process ClaimTrespass ClaimConversion ClaimRes JudicataNuisance DefenseAppellate Review
References
53
Case No. ADJ1312021
Regular
Nov 01, 2013

GRICELDA AREVALOS vs. PERSONNEL PLUS, INC., LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board order corrects clerical errors in a prior decision regarding Gricelda Arevalos's case. The errors involved an incorrect case number in the caption and an extra space within the case number later in the document. The Board is correcting these errors to reflect the accurate case number ADJ1312021 without further proceedings. This amendment ensures the official record is accurate.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDCLERICAL ERRORSORDER CORRECTINGPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONCASE NUMBER CORRECTIONADJ7430358ADJ0302021ADJ1312021SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGSCONTINGENT PROCEEDINGS
References
0
Case No. ADJ3283274 (VNO 0386537) ADJ4545965 (VNO 0386536) ADJ3421140 (VNO 0347301)
Regular
Jan 25, 2010

BARBARA STRAUSS vs. WEST MARINE, INC., CIGA for RELIANCE in liquidation, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY, FIREMAN'S FUND

This case involves a clerical error in the caption of a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denying reconsideration. The error involved the incorrect assignment of ADJ and VNO numbers to the relevant case numbers. The WCAB is correcting this error to accurately reflect the case numbers as ADJ3283274 and VNO 0386537. This correction ensures proper record-keeping for applicant Barbara Strauss and defendants West Marine, Inc., et al.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOrder Denying ReconsiderationFindings and AwardAdministrative Law JudgeClerical ErrorCorrected Case NumberADJ NumberVNO NumberReversal of NumbersLiquidation
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 2,932 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