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

Texas Workforce Commission v. Olivas

Ms. Maria Elena Olivas, a former employee of the Texas Workforce Commission, filed a workers' compensation claim after developing injuries in March 2008. She was subsequently dismissed from employment in May 2009, leading her to file a suit against the Commission for retaliatory discharge. The Commission filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting sovereign immunity and arguing that Section 311.034 of the Texas Government Code mandated an unequivocal waiver of immunity, which it claimed was absent in the anti-retaliation provisions of Chapter 451. The trial court denied the Commission's plea. On appeal, the Commission contended that Section 311.034 abrogated existing Texas Supreme Court precedent (*Kerrville State Hosp. v. Fernandez*) that recognized a waiver of sovereign immunity for such claims against state agencies. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that the State Applications Act (SAA) still provides a clear and unambiguous waiver of sovereign immunity for retaliation claims against state agencies, and that neither Section 311.034 nor the *Travis Central Appraisal District v. Norman* decision altered this established legal analysis.

Sovereign ImmunityRetaliatory DischargeWorkers' Compensation ClaimPlea to JurisdictionAppellate ReviewGovernment CodeLabor CodeLegislative WaiverState AgenciesStatutory Construction
References
4
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
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

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

Rosenberg Development Corp. v. Imperial Performing Arts, Inc.

Imperial Performing Arts, Inc. (IPA) sued Rosenberg Development Corporation (RDC) for breach of contract and declaratory judgment. RDC filed a plea to the jurisdiction, claiming governmental immunity from suit. The trial court partially granted and partially denied RDC's plea. On interlocutory appeal, RDC challenged the denial of its plea. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's partial denial, holding that economic development corporations like RDC generally do not possess common law governmental immunity from suit for contract claims. The court further clarified that the statutory immunity granted to Type B corporations under Local Government Code § 505.106 is limited to tort claims and immunity from liability for damages, neither of which supported RDC's plea for immunity from suit in this contract dispute.

Governmental ImmunityEconomic Development CorporationPlea to JurisdictionBreach of ContractDeclaratory JudgmentTexas Local Government CodeGovernmental FunctionsPolitical SubdivisionsCommon Law ImmunityStatutory Immunity
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 04, 2003

Satterfield & Pontikes Construction, Inc. v. Irving Independent School District

This dissenting opinion argues that the Legislature's inclusion of 'sue and be sued' language in a statute outlining the powers and duties of an independent school district constitutes a waiver of the school district's governmental immunity to a suit for breach of contract. Justice Lang disagrees with the majority's affirmation of the trial court's ruling, which found the Irving Independent School District immune from suit. The opinion extensively reviews Texas Supreme Court decisions, particularly Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Brownsville Navigation District, asserting its continued applicability as controlling authority for 'sue and be sued' language as a clear and unambiguous waiver of immunity from suit. It further distinguishes tort from contract immunity and references a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision and recent Texas legislative action (Senate Bill 1017) to support the interpretation that 'sue and be sued' is a statutory waiver of immunity rather than merely a statement of an entity's capacity to sue.

Governmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityBreach of ContractSue and Be Sued LanguageStatutory InterpretationLegislative IntentJudicial PrecedentWaiver of ImmunityIndependent School DistrictConstruction Contract
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services v. Markida Renee Mitchell

Markida Renee Mitchell filed suit against the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, alleging she was unlawfully fired for filing a workers' compensation claim. The Department sought to dismiss the suit based on sovereign immunity, arguing the Legislature had not waived immunity for such claims or the damages sought. The trial court denied the Department's plea to the jurisdiction, relying on the Supreme Court of Texas's decision in Kerrville State Hospital v. Fernandez. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order, holding that Fernandez remains controlling precedent, which established a clear and unambiguous waiver of sovereign immunity for anti-retaliation claims against state agencies. The court further clarified that the State Application Act's reference to the Tort Claims Act only incorporates damage caps, not other jurisdictional limitations or bars on intentional torts, concluding that any immunity regarding remedies is from liability, not suit.

Sovereign ImmunityWorkers' Compensation RetaliationAnti-Retaliation LawPlea to JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealState Application ActTort Claims ActWaiver of ImmunityStatutory InterpretationStare Decisis
References
19
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
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. 01-02-01007-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 22, 2004

Sheldon A. Etie v. Walsh & Albert Co., Inc

This case addresses the interpretation of the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act regarding the scope of statutory employer/employee status and immunity from suit for subcontractors. The appellant, Sheldon A. Etie, was injured by an employee of Walsh & Albert Company, Ltd., a lower-tier subcontractor, while working on a construction site. Etie received workers' compensation benefits but also filed a negligence suit against Walsh & Albert. The central question was whether the general contractor's workers' compensation policy, which covered all subcontractors and their employees, extended immunity to lower-tier subcontractors. The Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that the statutory employer/employee relationship and subsequent immunity from suit extend throughout all tiers of subcontractors when covered by a single workers' compensation insurance policy provided by the general contractor.

Workers' Compensation ImmunityStatutory Employer DoctrineSubcontractor CoverageExclusive Remedy ProvisionFellow Servant ImmunitySummary Judgment AffirmationTexas Labor Code InterpretationConstruction Site InjuryTiered Subcontractor LiabilityIndependent Contractor Status
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 2,846 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