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. 08-15-00079-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2016

County of El Paso, Self-Insured v. Mary Orozco

Ruben Orozco, an El Paso County deputy sheriff, tragically died in a car accident while returning home from an extra-duty security assignment. His wife, Mary Orozco, sought death benefits from the self-insured County, which denied the claim, arguing Ruben was not in the course and scope of his employment. Initially, a hearing officer found the injury compensable, but the Appeals Panel reversed this, concluding Ruben was merely commuting. The trial court sided with Mary, granting her motion for summary judgment. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Ruben was not actively engaged in law enforcement duties at the moment of the accident, thus not acting within the course and scope of his employment.

Workers' CompensationScope of EmploymentAutomobile AccidentDeputy SheriffExtra-Duty AssignmentCommuting RuleDual-Purpose TravelSummary JudgmentDeath BenefitsTexas Law
References
22
Case No. 21-0614
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 2022

Cameron International Corporation A/K/A Cameron Systems Corporation v. Hugo A. Martinez and Dolores Ramirez, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Javier Garcia, Jr., Javier Mayagoitia, Sr., Individually and as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Javier Mayagoitia, Jr., Julieta Taylor Osman Martinez And Jeanne Chavez, Individually and as Next Friend and Guardian of M. C., a Minor Child

This case addresses the vicarious liability of an employer for an oilfield worker's negligence during a car accident. The Supreme Court of Texas examined whether the "special mission" exception applied to the "coming-and-going" rule when the worker was driving to an oilfield site after completing personal errands like buying groceries and fuel. The Court held that a personal trip for necessities, not directed by the employer, does not constitute a special mission, thus reversing the appellate court's decision and reinstating the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the employer, Cameron International Corporation. The decision clarifies the distinction between common law vicarious liability and workers' compensation claims regarding the scope of employment.

Vicarious LiabilitySpecial Mission ExceptionComing and Going RuleEmployer NegligenceCourse and Scope of EmploymentOilfield AccidentPersonal ErrandsSummary JudgmentTexas LawRespondeat Superior
References
16
Case No. Misc. No. 257
En Banc
Dec 16, 2015

vs. Javier Jimenez

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice of its intention to suspend Javier Jimenez's privilege to appear as a representative for 180 days due to a pattern of misconduct, frivolous tactics, and failure to comply with sanction orders.

Labor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionAppeals Board en bancSanctionsBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsLien claimantsLabor Code section 5700 agentWCJDiscovery abuse
References
18
Case No. Misc. No. 257
Significant

vs. Javier Jimenez

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice of intention to suspend Javier Jimenez's privilege to appear as a representative for 180 days, citing a pattern of bad-faith tactics, frivolous actions, and repeated failure to comply with sanction orders.

Labor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionWCAB en bancSanctionsBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsUnnecessary delayLien claimantsLabor Code section 5700 agentRepeated misconduct
References
18
Case No. Misc. No. 257
En Banc
Feb 18, 2016

vs. JAVIER JIMENEZ

The Appeals Board suspended the privilege of Javier Jimenez to appear as a representative for 180 days due to his failure to respond to a Notice of Intention to Suspend, which was based on non-compliance with prior sanction orders.

WCABLabor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionNotice of IntentionSanction ordersEn banc decisionAdministrative law judgeCompliance180-day suspensionFurther hearing
References
0
Case No. Misc. No. 257
Significant

vs. Javier Jimenez, Respondent

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board suspends the privilege of Javier Jimenez to appear as a party representative for 180 days, with the suspension continuing until he complies with prior sanction orders, following his failure to respond to a Notice of Intention.

WCABJavier JimenezRepresentative PrivilegeSuspensionLabor Code Section 4907En BancNotice Of IntentionSanction OrdersComplianceAdministrative Law Judges
References
1
Case No. 17-0381
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 20, 2020

Mary Orozco v. County of El Paso, Self-Insured

Mary Orozco, the widow of a deputy sheriff, sought workers' compensation benefits after her husband died in a vehicular accident while driving his assigned patrol car home from an extra-duty assignment. The central issue was whether his death occurred within the course and scope of his employment with El Paso County. The Supreme Court of Texas reversed the lower court's decision, ruling in favor of the widow. The Court determined that the authorized operation of a marked patrol car on public roads, even during off-duty travel from an approved extra-duty assignment, constituted a law-enforcement activity that originated in and furthered the employer's business, especially given the county's provision and control over the vehicle.

Workers' CompensationScope of EmploymentLaw Enforcement OfficerVehicular AccidentExtra-Duty EmploymentTake-Home Patrol CarComing-and-Going Rule ExceptionDual-Purpose RuleTexas Supreme CourtEl Paso County Sheriff's Department
References
11
Case No. ADJ7711113
Regular
Apr 04, 2012

Lilia Orozco vs. EL POLLO LOCO

This Workers' Compensation Appeals Board case, ADJ7711113, involved applicant Lilia Orozco seeking benefits from El Pollo Loco. Orozco claimed injury to her musculoskeletal system, psyche, and other areas. The Board denied Orozco's Petition for Reconsideration, upholding the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) decision. The WCJ found insufficient evidence that Orozco sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment prior to her termination for misconduct. The Board gave great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, which were crucial in denying the reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Lilia OrozcoEl Pollo LocoESISMusculoskeletalPsycheInternal
References
1
Case No. 03-09-00635-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 19, 2011

Texas Racing Commission and Charla Ann King, Executive Director v. Javier Marquez D/B/A J&M Racing and Farm

Javier Marquez's racehorses were disqualified and their race purse redistributed due to inadvertently wearing incorrect saddle cloth numbers, a violation of commission rules. Marquez appealed the stewards' decision to the Texas Racing Commission, but the executive director, Charla Ann King, denied the appeal, citing a provision of the Texas Racing Act that deemed such decisions final. Marquez then filed a suit against the Commission and King, seeking declaratory relief. The trial court denied relief under the Administrative Procedure Act but granted it under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, declaring that King exceeded her statutory authority by denying the appeal and by disqualifying the horses and redistributing the purse. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed that the director exceeded her authority by refusing the administrative appeal, but vacated and dismissed the trial court's rulings on the disqualification and purse redistribution, holding that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction until Marquez exhausted his administrative remedies. The court also affirmed a reduced award of attorney's fees.

Racing ActAdministrative LawDeclaratory JudgmentSovereign ImmunityUltra Vires ClaimAdministrative AppealHorse RacingDisqualificationPurse RedistributionSubject Matter Jurisdiction
References
20
Case No. ADJ6939588; ADJ8656131
Regular
Dec 16, 2013

FRANCISCO OROZCO vs. GLOBAL PLASTIC; AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Francisco Orozco's Petition for Removal seeking to rescind an order taking his case off calendar. Orozco argued the order was based on non-compliance with Labor Code section 4061(i), which he contended was unconstitutional and violated due process. The Board found removal was an extraordinary remedy not warranted here as Orozco failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and the Board lacks the authority to declare statutes unconstitutional.

Petition for RemovalLabor Code section 4061(i)unconstitutionaldue processsubstantial prejudiceirreparable harmreconsiderationmedical evaluationagreed medical evaluatorqualified medical evaluator
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 114 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