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

Travelers Indemnity Co. of Rhode Island v. Starkey

The Travelers Indemnity Company of Rhode Island appealed a trial court's judgment that awarded death benefits to Lynn Edward Starkey and Hazel Dean Starkey under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. The case stemmed from Jonathan Starkey's work-related injuries in 1984, for which Travelers paid indemnity benefits until his death in 2001. His parents subsequently sought death benefits, which Travelers disputed, asserting a right to deduct previously paid benefits. The trial court found that Travelers had waived this credit in a third-party settlement agreement. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that the contractual language constituted a waiver of Travelers' rights to an offset and upheld the award of benefits, attorneys' fees, interest, and costs to the Starkeys.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsIndemnity BenefitsThird-Party SettlementContractual WaiverCredit OffsetWage Rate DisputeAppellate CourtTexas LawEvidentiary Sufficiency
References
22
Case No. 03-94-00339-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 16, 1995

Charlie Franks and Industrial Indemnity Insurance Company v. Sematech, Inc., F/D/B/A Semi Conductor Manufacturing Technology Initiative And Burle Industries, Inc.

This case from the Texas Court of Appeals addresses an injured employee's third-party liability claim and an insurance carrier's derivative subrogation rights under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. Charlie Franks was injured, and the workers' compensation carrier, Industrial Indemnity Insurance Company, paid benefits and subsequently filed a subrogation lawsuit. Franks intervened with his own negligence claim, but his intervention was dismissed due to the two-year statute of limitations. Consequently, the trial court granted summary judgment against Industrial Indemnity, ruling its derivative subrogation claim moot as Franks's underlying rights could not be established. The appellate court affirmed both decisions, emphasizing that Industrial Indemnity's initial suit did not assert Franks's full third-party liability cause of action for his joint benefit.

Workers' CompensationSubrogationStatute of LimitationsThird-Party LiabilitySummary JudgmentPlea in InterventionAppellate ReviewTexas LawInsurance Carrier RightsDerivative Claim
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas General Indemnity Co. v. Hearn

This workers' compensation case involves Margaret Ann Hearn (appellee) and Texas General Indemnity Company (appellant). Hearn alleged a work-related injury at Louisiana-Pacific and filed a claim for benefits under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. Texas General Indemnity Company, the workers' compensation insurer, contended that Hearn made an election of remedies by previously filing for and receiving medical and disability benefits from Louisiana-Pacific's group health carrier, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, based on representations that her condition was not work-related. The trial court prevented the introduction of evidence regarding the election of remedies, and a jury returned a verdict in favor of Hearn. The appellant appealed, and the higher court reversed the judgment, remanding the case for a full trial on the merits, ruling that the exclusion of evidence regarding the election of remedies was an error.

election of remediesworkers' compensationevidentiary errorreversalremandgroup health benefitsjob-related injurynon-work related injuryappellate proceduretrial court error
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Associated Indemnity Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, a workmen's compensation insurer for a temporary labor contractor (Greene's Temporaries, Inc.), sued Associated Indemnity Company, the insurer for a customer (Frito-Lay Company), seeking subrogation for a compensation claim paid to an injured temporary employee. Hartford contended the loss was covered by Associated's policy as the employee was under Frito-Lay's control. The court reversed the trial court's decision in favor of Hartford, denying equitable subrogation. The appellate court found that Hartford had collected premiums for the temporary employees and was charged with knowledge of the contractual arrangement, thus preventing unjust enrichment if subrogation were granted.

Workmen's CompensationTemporary EmploymentSubrogationInsurance LawBorrowed Servant DoctrineRight of ControlEquitable RemediesUnjust EnrichmentInsurance PremiumsContractual Agreements
References
17
Case No. 10-11-00142-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 2013

Dan Daniels v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North America

Dan Daniels, an elevator installer for ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corporation, sued Indemnity Insurance Company of North America, his former employer's workers' compensation carrier, after an adverse administrative decision by the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC). Daniels sought judicial review regarding the calculation of his Average Weekly Wage (AWW) and his post-injury earnings, specifically contesting the exclusion of certain payments made by ThyssenKrupp to his union for "health and other benefits" from his pre-injury AWW, and the valuation of a vehicle provided by the State of Missouri as part of his post-injury earnings. The trial court granted summary judgment for Indemnity and denied Daniels's motion for partial summary judgment. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that the payments to the union were not includable in AWW and that Daniels's post-injury pecuniary and nonpecuniary wages were not less than 80% of his pre-injury AWW, thus disentitling him to Supplemental Income Benefits (SIBs).

Workers' CompensationSupplemental Income BenefitsAverage Weekly WageNonpecuniary WagesSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewTexas Labor CodeAdministrative DecisionEmployer PaymentsPost-Injury Earnings
References
14
Case No. NO. 2-02-135-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 06, 2003

Carol S. Covington v. the Travelers Indemnity Company of Rhode Island/Connecticut

Carol S. Covington appealed a take-nothing summary judgment in her bad-faith claim against The Travelers Indemnity Company of Rhode Island/Connecticut (Travelers). Covington sought weekly indemnity benefits for a 1990 work injury sustained while employed by American Airlines, arguing Travelers breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing by failing to pay. The Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (TWCC) had initially awarded Covington benefits, which she appealed. The Court of Appeals found that Covington presented more than a scintilla of evidence that Travelers' liability was 'reasonably clear,' and that a factual dispute existed regarding the extent of her injury. Therefore, the appellate court reversed the trial court's summary judgment and remanded the case for trial, concluding that Travelers had not conclusively established a good-faith dispute.

Summary Judgment AppealBad Faith ClaimInsurance LawWorkers' CompensationDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingTexas Civil ProcedureBreach of ContractExtra-Contractual ClaimsDenial of BenefitsAppellate Review
References
16
Case No. 03-05-00309-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 12, 2006

TPCIGA, for Reliance National Indemnity Company v. Magdalena Ford Morrison A/N/F of Eric Ford

This case addresses the duration of workers' compensation death benefits for a deceased employee's minor, dependent stepchild in Texas. TPCIGA, representing Reliance National Indemnity Company, argued that benefits for Eric Ford should be limited to 364 weeks due to his dependent status. Magdalena Ford Morrison, on behalf of Eric, contended that as a minor, Eric was entitled to benefits until age 18, or up to age 25 if enrolled as a full-time student, under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. The Texas Workers' Compensation Commission initially limited benefits, but the Travis County court reversed this, granting summary judgment for Morrison. The appellate court affirmed, interpreting the Act's sections 408.182 and 408.183 to mean a minor child's eligibility for benefits is based on minority, not solely dependency, entitling Eric to benefits until age 18 or 25 under student provisions.

Death BenefitsMinor DependencyStepchild EligibilityBenefit DurationStatutory InterpretationTexas Labor Code §408.183Appellate ReviewSummary Judgment RulingAdministrative LawTexas Courts of Appeals
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Pacific Indemnity Insurance Company v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Vidal Lopez

Pacific Indemnity Insurance, a workers' compensation carrier, sued Liberty Mutual Insurance for reimbursement in district court without first exhausting administrative remedies with the Industrial Accident Board (IAB). This lawsuit stemmed from a worker's injury in 1984 and subsequent re-injury in 1988. Pacific Indemnity, the carrier for the initial injury, continued to pay benefits after the re-injury and sought reimbursement from Liberty Mutual, the subsequent carrier, which was denied. The IAB issued orders regarding payments but did not address the reimbursement claim. The district court granted summary judgment for Liberty Mutual, a decision upheld on appeal because Pacific Indemnity failed to obtain an IAB ruling on the reimbursement issue before filing suit, thereby lacking jurisdiction in district court. The failure to exhaust administrative remedies bars the suit as a matter of law.

Administrative RemediesExhaustion DoctrineSummary JudgmentInsurance ReimbursementIndustrial Accident BoardJurisdictionAppellate ReviewCarrier DisputeRepetitious TraumaTexas Workers' Compensation Law
References
3
Case No. 03-00-00801-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2001

Reliance National Indemnity Company v. Laura Rose Bar-Yardin and United Fashions of Texas, Ltd.

Reliance National Indemnity Company appealed the district court's summary judgment in favor of Laura Rose Bar-Yardin and United Fashions of Texas Ltd. The case stemmed from a car accident involving Corinne Meler, a T.G.I. Friday's employee, who died while acting within the scope of her employment. Because Meler had no qualified legal beneficiaries, Reliance, as the workers' compensation carrier, paid death benefits to the Subsequent Injury Fund. Reliance then sued Bar-Yardin, asserting subrogation rights to recover these benefits, arguing the Fund qualified as a 'legal beneficiary.' The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that under Texas law, a workers' compensation carrier is not entitled to subrogation for death benefits paid to the Subsequent Injury Fund, as the Fund lacks a direct cause of action against a third-party tortfeasor to which the carrier could be subrogated.

Workers' CompensationSubrogation RightsSubsequent Injury FundLegal BeneficiaryDeath BenefitsSummary JudgmentTexas Labor CodeCar AccidentThird-Party LiabilityInsurance Carrier
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. Home Indemnity Co.

Newell G. Smith appealed a summary judgment granted to The Home Indemnity Company in two consolidated worker's compensation cases. Smith initially filed claims and received benefits from Safeway's group health insurance, asserting his injuries were not work-related. He later filed worker's compensation claims, which the insurance company contended were filed beyond the statutory period and constituted an election of remedies. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that Smith made a voluntary and informed choice to pursue group health benefits, thereby precluding his worker's compensation claims. The court also found no good cause for the late filing of his first worker's compensation claim.

worker's compensationsummary judgmentelection of remedieslate filinggood causegroup insurance benefitsoccupational injurydeemed admissionsinconsistent remediesappellate review
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 11,702 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