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. 15-24-00120-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 06, 2024

State of Texas v. Harris County, Texas

Appellees, Harris County, Texas, filed a motion requesting the Fifteenth Court of Appeals to vacate an injunction issued on December 6, 2024. The injunction prohibited Harris County from distributing funds under its Community Prosperity Program during the appeal's pendency. Harris County argues that the court improperly relied on uninvoked inherent authority, overreached its power as its jurisdiction was not threatened, and failed to consider required factors for injunctive relief. Harris County asserts that the injunction is unnecessary because the program's payments are not scheduled to begin until May 2025, providing ample time for the court to rule on the merits.

injunctionvacate motionappellate lawTexas courtsHarris CountyState of TexasCommunity Prosperity Programgovernmental immunityultra vires claimsGift Clauses
References
111
Case No. 01-24-00096-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 13, 2025

Harris County, Texas, Harris County Commissioners Court, Lina Hidalgo and Edward Gonzalez v. Jane Doe

Appellee Jane Doe, an employee at the Harris County Jail, filed suit against appellants Harris County, Harris County Commissioners Court, Lina Hidalgo (in her official capacity), and Edward Gonzalez (in his official capacity) under the Texas Tort Claims Act (TTCA). Doe alleged sexual assault by an inmate due to understaffing at the jail. Appellants responded with a plea to the jurisdiction, which the trial court denied. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas reversed the trial court's order, finding that the TTCA's election of remedies provision barred the suit against the individual employees (Hidalgo and Gonzalez) and that immunity was not waived for Harris County and the Commissioners Court because the jail premises merely provided the backdrop for the assault, not its cause. The court rendered a judgment of dismissal of appellee's claims.

Texas Court of AppealsGovernmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActPremises LiabilitySexual AssaultJail ConditionsUnderstaffingElection of RemediesOfficial Capacity
References
33
Case No. 01-08-00473-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 23, 2009

Expo Motorcars, LLC. v. Harris County Appraisal District, Harris County Appraisal Review Board

Expo Motorcars, L.L.C. challenged the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Harris County Appraisal District (HCAD) and Harris County Appraisal Review Board. Expo contested the constitutionality and application of Texas Tax Code sections 23.121(b) and 41.44(a)(1) regarding the valuation of its motor vehicle inventory for tax years 2004 and 2005. Expo argued it was denied meaningful due process review, presented uncontradicted evidence of actual value, and claimed the statutory formula violated the Texas Constitution. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that Expo's protest was untimely for 2004, the valuation method correctly used previous year's sales, and the tax code sections were constitutional as applied to Expo.

property taxmotor vehicle inventoryappraisaldue processTexas Tax Codeconstitutional challengesummary judgmenttax valuationstatutory interpretationappeal
References
4
Case No. 14-23-00348-CV, 14-23-00672-CV, 14-23-00736-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 27, 2024

Harris County v. Jerry Luman, Norman Verbosky, and David Williams

This consolidated opinion from the Fourteenth Court of Appeals addresses multiple whistleblower claims against Harris County. The court affirmed the denial of Harris County's pleas to the jurisdiction for Jerry Luman, Norman Verbosky, and David Williams, allowing their claims to proceed. Conversely, it reversed and remanded the summary judgment previously granted against Jerry Luman. For Mary Ann Carrion, Cindy Vara-Leija, and Dwayne Pacifico, the court affirmed the granting of Harris County's pleas to the jurisdiction, largely due to their failure to exhaust grievance procedures or establish a good faith report of a violation of law.

Whistleblower ActRetaliationPublic EmployeeSummary JudgmentPlea to JurisdictionHarris CountyTexas Whistleblower ActAdverse Employment ActionGood Faith ReportCausation
References
19
Case No. 14-22-00367-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2023

Harris County, Texas v. Joshua Jacob Mireles, Cristin Mireles, and Colonial County Mutual Insurance Company

Harris County appealed the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction, asserting governmental immunity against claims arising from a car accident involving a deputy constable and Joshua Jacob Mireles. Joshua Mireles filed a counterclaim, while Cristin Mireles and Colonial County Mutual Insurance Company intervened, all seeking recovery from Harris County. The court affirmed the denial of the plea for Joshua's counterclaim to the extent it sought offsetting damages against the county's claim. However, the court reversed the denial of the plea for the intervenors' claims, concluding that Harris County's governmental immunity was not waived and Deputy Solis's official immunity was conclusively established. Consequently, the intervenors' claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and the case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Governmental ImmunityOfficial ImmunityPlea to JurisdictionMotor Vehicle AccidentEmergency ResponseCounterclaimInterventionTexas Tort Claims ActAppellate ReviewGood Faith
References
53
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Harris County v. Dillard

James Earl Skeen, an off-duty and intoxicated Harris County reserve deputy sheriff, caused a fatal car accident. The statutory beneficiaries of Lila Jean Dillard, who was killed, and Stephanie Hunold, who was severely injured, sued Harris County. They alleged Harris County was liable for Skeen's conduct, arguing he was an 'employee' under the Texas Tort Claims Act despite being a volunteer. The trial court and court of appeals found in favor of the plaintiffs, interpreting 'employee' to include volunteers. However, the Texas Supreme Court reversed these judgments, holding that the Texas Tort Claims Act only waives sovereign immunity for actions of 'paid' employees. Since Skeen was not a paid employee, Harris County was not liable for his actions, and the plaintiffs' action against the county was barred by governmental immunity.

Sovereign ImmunityGovernmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActEmployee DefinitionVolunteer LiabilityReserve Deputy SheriffNegligenceStatutory InterpretationWaiver of ImmunityPaid Service
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Harris County v. Williams

Robert Williams, a Harris County constable, sustained injuries and received workers' compensation benefits from his self-insured employer, Harris County. Williams also pursued a claim against the Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association (the Fund) after the third-party tortfeasor's insurer became insolvent, receiving $100,000. Subsequently, Harris County refused to pay Williams impairment benefits, asserting a subrogation offset from the Fund payment. The Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission appeals panel initially supported Harris County, but a district court reversed, ruling against Harris County's subrogation claim. This appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that a self-insured governmental entity is not entitled to subrogation against funds received by a workers’ compensation claimant from the Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association.

Subrogation RightsTexas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty ActSelf-Insured Governmental EntitiesImpaired InsurerStatutory ConstructionInsurance Guaranty FundsWorkers' Compensation BenefitsThird-Party Liability ClaimsTexas Labor CodeAppellate Review
References
15
Case No. 03-21-00429-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2022

Greg Abbott in His Official Capacity as Governor of Texas And Ken Paxton In His Official Capacity as Texas Attorney General v. Harris County, Texas

This case involves an interlocutory appeal by Governor Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton challenging a trial court's denial of their plea to the jurisdiction and the issuance of a temporary injunction. The core legal question is whether Governor Abbott, under the Texas Disaster Act, can issue an executive order (GA-38) that prohibits local governmental entities, such as Harris County, from implementing face-covering requirements. Harris County officials contend these mandates are vital for public health during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's orders, concluding that the trial court possessed subject-matter jurisdiction and did not err in granting the temporary injunction, as the Governor's actions were likely ultra vires.

Texas Disaster ActExecutive Order GA-38Face Covering MandatesCOVID-19 MitigationLocal Government AuthorityGubernatorial PowersUltra Vires ClaimTemporary InjunctionSubject Matter JurisdictionSovereign Immunity
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 25, 1975

Alberti v. Sheriff of Harris County, Texas

This Memorandum and Opinion addresses severe and inhumane overcrowding and substandard conditions in Harris County detention facilities. The court finds that the Harris County Commissioners Court and Sheriff's Department have failed to comply with federal and state law, as well as a prior Consent Judgment, resulting in constitutional violations for inmates. Key issues include inadequate physical space, poor sanitation, insufficient medical and psychiatric care, understaffing, and a failing Pre-Trial Release Agency hampered by commercial bail bondsmen. The court orders significant reforms, including transferring the Pre-Trial Release Agency's operational control to state District Judges, implementing an objective pre-trial release system, streamlining criminal justice procedures, and mandating comprehensive improvements in jail conditions, staff training, and inmate classification. An Ombudsman is established to monitor compliance, and detailed reporting requirements are set for the defendants.

OvercrowdingPre-Trial Release ReformInmate Constitutional RightsJail Conditions LitigationCriminal Justice System ImprovementHarris County Detention FacilitiesJudicial OversightBail ReformMedical Screening InmatesPsychiatric Care Inmates
References
33
Case No. 14-12-00087-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 15, 2013

Tim Piland v. Harris County, Texas

The case involves a dispute over workers' compensation benefit reimbursement. Tim Piland, an employee of Harris County, received a settlement for a work-related personal injury. Although a settlement agreement stipulated that Harris County would be reimbursed for workers' compensation benefits, Piland received the full settlement amount, and the County was not paid. Harris County subsequently sued Piland for payment of its statutory lien and breach of contract, more than three years after the settlement. Piland argued the County's claim was time-barred, asserting it was a conversion claim with a two-year statute of limitations. The trial court ruled in favor of Harris County, granting its summary judgment motion. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Harris County had a valid and timely breach-of-contract claim, which is subject to a four-year statute of limitations.

Workers' CompensationReimbursementBreach of ContractStatute of LimitationsSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewStatutory LienSettlement AgreementConversionCivil Procedure
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 6,824 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