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 Department of Insurance v. Reconveyance Services, Inc.

Reconveyance Services, Inc. (Reconveyance) sought declaratory relief against the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act. Reconveyance aimed to offer post-closing mortgage release services in Texas for a separate fee via title insurance companies, but TDI considered these services covered by existing premiums and threatened enforcement against agents charging extra. TDI challenged the district court's subject-matter jurisdiction, asserting separation-of-powers principles and lack of a justiciable controversy. The district court denied TDI's plea, and the appellate court affirmed, concluding that Reconveyance had presented a justiciable controversy regarding TDI's statutory authority.

Declaratory ReliefStatutory InterpretationAdministrative LawAgency AuthoritySubject Matter JurisdictionJusticiabilityRipenessStandingTexas Title Insurance ActPost-closing Mortgage Release Services
References
42
Case No. A.D. No. 69820
Regular Panel Decision

Rochester Telephone Corp. v. Public Service Commission

The Public Service Commission (PSC) reduced Rochester Telephone Corporation's (RTC) utility rates by imputing a 2% royalty due to improper cost-shifting and uncompensated transfers of RTC’s intangible assets to its subsidiaries. Concurrently, PSC created a rebuttable presumption of a 2% royalty for other regulated utilities. RTC challenged these actions in a CPLR article 78 proceeding, which the Appellate Division confirmed. This Court affirmed the Appellate Division's decision, finding both the royalty and the rebuttable presumption to be rational means for establishing just and reasonable utility rates. Additionally, the Court dismissed constitutional claims, ruling the Commerce Clause claim justiciable but the takings issue non-justiciable due to specific case circumstances and a Joint Stipulation.

Utility RegulationRate-making PolicyIntangible Asset ValuationRoyalty ImputationCost ShiftingPublic Service Commission AuthorityAppellate ReviewConstitutional ClaimsCommerce ClauseTakings Clause
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State Office of Risk Mangement v. Linda Rodriguez

Linda Rodriguez, a former Texas Department of Human Services employee, sustained a compensable injury in 1998, reaching maximum medical improvement (MMI) in 2000. Her worker's compensation claim centered on a disputed impairment rating (IR), with designated doctor Howard Douglas assigning 5 percent and treating physician Terren Klein assigning 23 percent. Rodriguez appealed the Division's 5 percent IR determination to the district court. The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) filed a second plea to the jurisdiction, arguing no justiciable issue existed as only one valid IR was presented. The trial court overruled SORM's plea, and this appellate court affirmed that decision, finding a justiciable controversy regarding the validity of Dr. Klein's 23 percent IR.

Workers' CompensationImpairment RatingMaximum Medical ImprovementJurisdictionDe Novo ReviewTexas Labor CodeMedical EvidenceDesignated DoctorTreating PhysicianAdministrative Law
References
16
Case No. 03-06-00313-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 2007

Texas Department of Insurance v. Reconveyance Services, Inc.

The Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) appealed a district court's denial of its plea to jurisdiction in a case brought by Reconveyance Services, Inc. (Reconveyance). Reconveyance sought declaratory relief under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (UDJA), alleging TDI acted without statutory authority by prohibiting title insurers and agents from charging a separate fee for its post-closing mortgage release services. TDI contended the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, citing separation-of-powers and non-justiciability principles. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order, finding Reconveyance's claim presented a justiciable controversy regarding the scope of TDI's statutory authority. The court concluded that statutory construction is an inherently judicial function and TDI had not been granted exclusive jurisdiction over the dispute, thus the district court properly exercised jurisdiction.

Judicial ReviewAgency AuthorityStatutory InterpretationDeclaratory JudgmentAdministrative LawJurisdictionTexas Title Insurance ActRegulatory OversightJusticiabilitySeparation of Powers
References
50
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Rita N.

This opinion addresses multiple pending proceedings where petitioners (aunts, uncles, grandparents, natural parents) seek court recognition of existing living arrangements for children for various administrative purposes like school enrollment, social security benefits, or medical authorization. The court observes that these petitioners primarily seek a "piece of paper" (letter of guardianship) to satisfy bureaucratic requirements, even though the children already reside with them. Judge Fogarty explains that the Family Court lacks original jurisdiction over guardianship proceedings, as the Legislature has limited its authority to cases where a child is already under the court's jurisdiction on some other basis. The opinion clarifies that custody proceedings are being used as a "subterfuge" to circumvent this jurisdictional limitation, but such proceedings require an "adversary context" and "justiciable dispute." The court concludes that these matters properly belong in the Surrogate's Court, which has concurrent jurisdiction over infant guardianship and simplified procedures. Therefore, the petitions are dismissed, and the parties are referred to the Surrogate’s Court, as there is no justiciable dispute or custodial controversy before the Family Court.

GuardianshipFamily Court JurisdictionSurrogate's CourtCustody ProceedingsJudicial PowerParens PatriaeInfant WardsJurisdictional LimitationsBest Interest of ChildLetters of Guardianship
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Leonard v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

The complaint was properly dismissed as it alleged no current justiciable controversy. The judgment and orders were unanimously affirmed, with costs awarded to the defendants-respondents.

Justiciable ControversyComplaint DismissalJudgment AffirmationCosts AwardedPanel DecisionUnanimous DecisionAppellate Review
References
0
Case No. ADJ91 42464
Regular
Mar 18, 2016

MARIA ELENA GRIJALVA vs. CARE ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONALS, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted defendant's petition for removal, rescinding the WCJ's order for a PQME to comment on previously denied medical treatment. Discovery closed at the Mandatory Settlement Conference, and the UR/IMR denials rendered the treatment dispute non-justiciable at trial. Applicant must submit a new RFA for the disputed treatment, not seek PQME opinion. The case returns to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for RemovalQualified Medical Evaluator (PQME)Utilization Review (UR)Independent Medical Review (IMR)Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC)Discovery ClosureRequest for Authorization (RFA)Treating PhysicianMedical Treatment DisputeAdministrative Law Judge (WCJ)
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 30, 1978

Hughes, Harrison & Brown Roofing, Inc. v. Wm. F. Slack, Inc.

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiffs appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Orange County, which dismissed their complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Plaintiffs had alleged that defendant insurance brokers assured them of adequate workers' compensation insurance, but a subsequent employee injury led to a denied claim and a personal injury action. Plaintiffs sought indemnification and reimbursement from the defendants. The court affirmed the dismissal, agreeing that no justiciable issue currently existed, and suggested that plaintiffs pursue impleader or an independent action for indemnity when grounds are established, to align with policies for expeditious processing of actions.

Declaratory JudgmentInsurance CoverageWorkers' CompensationPersonal InjuryJusticiable IssueDismissal of ComplaintIndemnificationAppellate ReviewProcedural IssuesOrange County Supreme Court
References
2
Case No. 01-19-00025-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2020

Dee Hobbs, Williamson County Attorney v. Dan A. Gattis, Williamson County Judge Terry Cook, Cynthia Long, Valerie Covey, and Larry Madsen, County Commissioners

Dee Hobbs, in his official capacity as the Williamson County Attorney, appealed the trial court's grant of a plea to the jurisdiction. Hobbs had sued the Williamson County Judge and Commissioners, challenging policies that restricted the salary he could offer new or promoted employees, arguing these policies exceeded the Commissioners Court's authority. The trial court dismissed the case, finding no justiciable controversy and that Hobbs lacked standing. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, concluding that Hobbs's pleading did not demonstrate a live controversy or sufficient standing, and did not invoke the district court's supervisory jurisdiction over the Commissioners Court.

Plea to the JurisdictionStandingJusticiable ControversyDeclaratory JudgmentSupervisory JurisdictionWilliamson CountyCommissioners CourtCounty AttorneyEmployee SalariesBudgetary Discretion
References
37
Case No. 05-05-01069-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 20, 2006

In Re JP

This case concerns Jose Garcia's appeal of the termination of his parental rights to C.G. Garcia challenged the termination due to alleged lack of notice, the denial of a new trial, and the dismissal of his sister's petition to intervene. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that Garcia had waived his right to notice and that his letter did not qualify as an answer. The court also determined that Garcia's failure to appear was intentional, thus not meeting the Craddock factors for a new trial. Furthermore, it was ruled that Garcia lacked a justiciable interest to appeal his sister's intervention dismissal, and even if he did, her standing was not meritorious.

Parental Rights TerminationDue ProcessDefault JudgmentMotion for New TrialIntervention (Legal)Child Protective ServicesPaternity TestWaiver of NoticeAppellate ReviewAbuse of Discretion
References
19
Showing 1-10 of 57 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