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
Dec 14, 2017

Claim of King v. Riccelli Enterprises

Claimant Laurence King, a truck driver, sustained neck and back injuries in April 2013 and filed for workers' compensation benefits. Initially, the Workers' Compensation Board ruled he voluntarily withdrew from the labor market after being laid off in November 2013. A WCLJ later found reattachment to the labor market and awarded benefits with an 81% loss of wage-earning capacity. On review, the Board rescinded the reattachment finding and determined a permanent partial disability with a 50% loss of wage-earning capacity. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's finding of no reattachment to the labor market due to insufficient job search efforts. However, the court reversed the Board's finding of a 50% loss of wage-earning capacity, concluding it was not supported by substantial medical evidence regarding functional ability and loss, and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityLoss of Wage-Earning CapacityLabor Market AttachmentIndependent Medical ExaminationTreating Physician ReportAppellate ReviewRemandSubstantial EvidenceVocational Factors
References
11
Case No. CV-23-1881
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Carlos Jover

Carlos Jover appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying him permanent partial disability benefits due to a failure to demonstrate attachment to the labor market. Jover sustained work-related injuries in 2015, leading to a permanent partial disability classification in 2018 with a 75% loss of wage-earning capacity. The Board previously found insufficient evidence of job search efforts within his restrictions and later affirmed a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's finding that he failed to show labor market attachment, citing that many applied jobs required specialized qualifications, education, or English proficiency which he lacked. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that Jover did not engage in a diligent and persistent independent job search within his medical limitations. The decision highlighted the Board's discretion in evaluating witness credibility and weighing conflicting evidence regarding labor market attachment.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityLabor Market AttachmentWage-Earning CapacityJob Search EffortsMedical RestrictionsEnglish ProficiencyVocational DataSpinal Fusion SurgeryAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. 03-01-00340-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 09, 2001

Rick Perry, in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Texas Henry Cuellar, in His Official Capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Texas v. Alicia Del Rio, Phyllis Dunham and Jeremy Wright

This case is an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction by the District Court of Travis County. Appellants, including the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Secretary of State of Texas, argued that they were not 'governmental units' for the purpose of interlocutory appeal and that the appellees' redistricting claims were not ripe. The Third District Court of Appeals at Austin affirmed the district court's order, holding that state officials acting in their official capacities are indeed 'governmental units' under the Civil Practice & Remedies Code. The court also found that the consolidated redistricting lawsuit was ripe for judicial consideration, particularly after the state legislature adjourned without enacting a new congressional redistricting plan. Lastly, the court clarified that a prior federal court's retained jurisdiction over 1990 census-based redistricting did not preclude state court jurisdiction over challenges based on the 2000 census.

Interlocutory AppealPlea to the JurisdictionGovernmental UnitRipeness DoctrineOfficial CapacityRedistrictingCongressional DistrictsJurisdictionTexas ConstitutionCivil Practice & Remedies Code
References
27
Case No. 00-80050A
Regular Panel Decision
May 23, 2000

Victory Markets, Inc. v. NYS Unemployment Insurance (In Re Victory Markets Inc.)

Victory Markets, Inc. (VMI) and Victory Markets, LLC (LLC) initiated an adversary proceeding against the New York State Unemployment Insurance Division of the Department of Labor, challenging the Department's transfer of VMI's unemployment insurance tax experience rating to new owners following VMI's Chapter 11 reorganization. VMI argued this transfer violated its reorganization plan and negatively impacted funds available for creditors. The Department moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, contending the dispute involved non-debtor parties and state law, and was furthermore precluded by the Tax Injunction Act. The Bankruptcy Court, presided over by Chief Judge STEPHEN D. GERLING, granted the Department's motion, finding it lacked jurisdiction under 'arising in,' 'arising under,' or 'related to' doctrines, as the matter concerned a state agency's application of state law against non-debtors with a remote connection to the bankruptcy estate. The court also emphasized the availability of a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy in state courts, which barred federal intervention.

BankruptcySubject Matter JurisdictionTax Injunction ActNew York Labor LawUnemployment Insurance TaxChapter 11 ReorganizationAdversary ProceedingState Tax DisputeNon-Debtor PartiesExperience Rating Transfer
References
20
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 04343
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2017

Claim of Villalobos v. RNC Industries LLC

The claimant sustained a work-related injury in 2012 after falling from a ladder, affecting his head, neck, and back. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially determined a 73.5% loss of wage-earning capacity and found the claimant had reattached to the labor market. However, the Workers' Compensation Board subsequently reversed this decision, concluding that the claimant was not attached to the labor market and reduced his loss of wage-earning capacity to 40%. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to its assessment of the claimant's credibility regarding his job search efforts. The court also found substantial evidence supported the 40% loss of wage-earning capacity, considering the independent medical examiner's report, claimant's functional abilities, age, work history, education, and language proficiency.

Workers' CompensationLoss of Wage-Earning CapacityAttachment to Labor MarketPermanent Partial DisabilityMedical ImpairmentCredibility AssessmentSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewVocational RehabilitationJob Search
References
8
Case No. 524528
Regular Panel Decision
May 17, 2018

Matter of Bloomingdale v. Reale Constr. Co. Inc.

Claimant, who suffered multiple work-related injuries in 1992 and 2011, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision classifying him with a 33% loss of wage-earning capacity and suspending awards due to a lack of labor market attachment. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's determination regarding claimant's attachment to the labor market, finding it supported by substantial evidence of minimal job search efforts. However, the Court reversed the Board's assessment of a 33% loss of wage-earning capacity. It concluded that the medical evidence, extensive functional limitations, and limited vocational skills of the 55-year-old claimant did not support such a low impairment rating, necessitating a re-evaluation. The matter was remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings to correctly ascertain claimant's loss of wage-earning capacity.

Workers' Compensation LawPermanent Partial DisabilityLoss of Wage-Earning CapacityLabor Market AttachmentMedical ImpairmentVocational FactorsAppellate Division Third DepartmentRemittalBack InjuryNeck Injury
References
19
Case No. No. 08-22-00029-CV (TC# 2021DCV1132)
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2023

Ricardo A. Samaniego, in His Official Capacity as County Judge, Carlos Leon, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, David Stout, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Illiana Holguin, in Her Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Carl L. Robinson, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner v. Associated General Contractors of Texas, Highway, Heavy, Utilities & Industrial Branch and a Brothers Milling, LLC

The El Paso County Commissioners Court, including County Judge Ricardo A. Samaniego and Commissioners, appealed the denial of their plea to the jurisdiction. They were sued by Associated General Contractors of Texas and A Brothers Milling, LLC, who alleged the Commissioners Court acted ultra vires in setting prevailing wage rates for heavy-highway construction projects in El Paso County. The Appellants argued governmental immunity shielded them and that their wage determinations were final. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, concluding that the Appellees had sufficiently pleaded an ultra vires claim, which falls within the trial court's subject-matter jurisdiction. The court clarified that ultra vires acts by public officials are not considered acts of the state and therefore are not subject to the finality clause.

Governmental ImmunityUltra Vires ActPrevailing Wage RatePublic WorksSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Government CodeStatutory InterpretationEl Paso County
References
16
Case No. 11-06-00048-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 21, 2006

Midland Central Appraisal District and Midland County Appraisal Review Board v. Plains Marketing, L.P., a Texas Limited Partnership, and Plains Marketing GP Inc., General Partner

This ad valorem tax suit involves Plains Marketing, L.P. appealing the tax assessment on its crude oil inventory accounts. The Midland Central Appraisal District and Midland County Appraisal Review Board challenged the trial court's jurisdiction, asserting that Plains failed to exhaust administrative remedies. The trial court denied their challenge. The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that Plains had sufficiently exhausted its administrative remedies because the exemption claim was thoroughly discussed and determined by the Appraisal Review Board, despite initial protest notice deficiencies. The core issue revolved around whether oil stored in tank farms for future delivery constituted taxable inventory or was exempt under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Property TaxAd ValoremAdministrative RemediesJurisdictionExhaustion DoctrineInterstate CommerceOil InventoryAppraisal Review BoardTexas LawAppellate Review
References
35
Case No. 03-21-00571-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2023

Texas Department of State Health Services, and Dr. Jennifer A. Shuford, in Her Official Capacity as Commissioner of the Texas Department of State Health Services v. Sky Marketing Corp., D/B/A Hometown Hero Create a Cig Temple, LLC Darrell Surif And David Walden

The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) and its Commissioner appealed a trial court's denial of their plea to the jurisdiction and the granting of a temporary injunction. The injunction prevented DSHS from enforcing amendments to controlled substance definitions and a website rule concerning Delta-8 THC. Appellees argued the Commissioner acted beyond her authority (ultra vires) and violated the Texas Administrative Procedure Act by failing to follow proper procedures for schedule modifications. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that appellees had standing and presented valid ultra vires and APA claims. The appellate court also upheld the temporary injunction, citing the appellees' probable right to relief and the likelihood of imminent and irreparable harm.

Hemp legalizationDelta-8 THCControlled Substances Act (TCSA)Administrative Procedure Act (APA)Ultra ViresTemporary InjunctionSovereign ImmunityPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Department of State Health Services (DSHS)Cannabis regulation
References
64
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Coyle v. Midwest Steel

The claimant, an ironworker, suffered a work-related left knee injury in 1998, leading to multiple surgeries and consequential injuries to his back and right hip. After his light-duty job was eliminated, he retired in August 2009 due to medical restrictions, declining a full-duty position. The employer's workers’ compensation carrier argued voluntary removal from the labor market. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found involuntary retirement, but the Workers’ Compensation Board later denied further benefits, citing the claimant's failure to maintain attachment to the labor market. This court reverses the Board's decision, affirming that an involuntary retirement due to disability creates an inference of continued reduced earning capacity, and the employer failed to provide direct and positive proof that another factor was the sole cause of the reduced earning capacity, rather than relying solely on the claimant's failure to seek work post-retirement.

Involuntary RetirementLabor Market AttachmentReduced Earning CapacityCausally Related DisabilityEmployer Burden of ProofMedical RestrictionsAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceReversed DecisionWorkers' Compensation Board Ruling
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 3,348 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