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 Assistive and Rehabilitative Services, Successor in Interest to the Former Texas Rehabilitation Commission v. Richard Howard

Richard Howard, a unit manager with the Texas Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services, reported several alleged legal violations by his employer to the State Auditor’s Office. Howard subsequently experienced retaliation, including denial of promotions and merit pay increases, which he attributed to his whistleblowing activities. He successfully sued the department under the Whistleblower Act, and a jury awarded him damages. The Department appealed the verdict, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence on multiple grounds, including good faith reporting, appropriate authority, causation, and damages. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the jury's findings.

Whistleblower ActPublic Employee RetaliationPerformance EvaluationEmployment DiscriminationState Auditor's OfficeGood Faith ReportCausal LinkEconomic DamagesAppellate ReviewJury Verdict
References
20
Case No. ADJ647263 (MON 0206252) ADJ442715 (MON 0179484) ADJ8283867
Regular
Jul 25, 2013

SHARON HORNSBY vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES and DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, legally uninsured and adjusted by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns an applicant seeking workers' compensation benefits for multiple injuries across different dates of injury involving the Department of Social Services and the Department of Motor Vehicles, adjusted by the State Compensation Insurance Fund. The defendants have petitioned for reconsideration of a decision that found the applicant 100% disabled. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow further study of the factual and legal issues involved. The Board will issue a decision after this further review, which may include additional proceedings.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPetition for ReconsiderationLegally UninsuredState Compensation Insurance FundDepartment of Social ServicesDepartment of Motor VehiclesApplicantDefendantAdministrative Law Judge
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Department of Aging & Disability Services v. Beltran

Rosa Maria Beltran filed a workers' compensation claim after sustaining job-related injuries while employed by the Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services. Her employment was subsequently terminated on March 31, 2008, leading her to sue the Department for wrongful discharge, alleging retaliation for filing her claim under the Anti-Retaliation Law. The Department filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting sovereign immunity. The trial court denied this plea, and the Department appealed. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that the Legislature had clearly and unambiguously waived sovereign immunity for state agencies in retaliatory discharge claims under the Anti-Retaliation Law and the State Applications Act, consistent with established legal precedent.

Workers' CompensationRetaliationWrongful TerminationSovereign ImmunityWaiver of ImmunityStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewPlea to JurisdictionTexas Labor CodeGovernmental Immunity
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 07, 2014

B.K. v. New York City Department of Education

G.K., a child diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder, faced educational challenges for the 2011-2012 school year. His parents, B.K. and Y.K., initiated legal action against the New York City Department of Education, alleging that the Department failed to provide G.K. with a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) as mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA). The parents sought tuition reimbursement for G.K.'s private special education program and direct funding for home-based therapy, appealing an administrative decision that had previously denied their claims. The Department subsequently filed a cross-motion for summary judgment. The District Court, after conducting an independent review of the administrative record and giving due weight to the state administrative proceedings, denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and granted the Department's cross-motion, concluding that the May 2011 Individualized Education Program (IEP) proposed by the Department was procedurally and substantively adequate.

Individualized Education ProgramFree Appropriate Public EducationIndividuals with Disabilities Education ActAutism Spectrum DisorderSpecial EducationTuition ReimbursementDue Process HearingBehavioral Intervention PlanFunctional Behavioral AssessmentParental Participation
References
46
Case No. 03 Civ.2559 LAK
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 24, 2004

National Council of La Raza v. DEPARTMENT OF JUST.

Plaintiff advocacy organizations brought an action against the Department of Justice under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to compel the production of records concerning the authority of state and local police to enforce immigration laws. The Department withheld documents, asserting the deliberative process privilege under FOIA Exemption 5. The Court found that while most withheld documents qualified for the privilege, the Department had waived it for a key April 2002 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum by publicly incorporating its conclusions into agency policy. Consequently, the court partially granted and partially denied the Department's motion for summary judgment, ordering in camera review for some documents and directing the production of the April 2002 OLC memorandum to the plaintiffs.

FOIADeliberative Process PrivilegeAttorney-Client PrivilegeWaiverSummary JudgmentImmigration LawState AuthorityFederal PreemptionOLC OpinionDepartment of Justice
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Legal Aid Society v. Association of Legal Aid Attorneys

The Legal Aid Society sought a preliminary injunction against the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys and its officers to prevent the disciplining of striking union members who crossed picket lines. The plaintiff also claimed tortious interference and a civil rights conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) on behalf of itself, non-striking attorneys, and indigent clients. The District Court denied the injunction, finding several impediments to success on the merits. These included the NLRB's primary jurisdiction, the Norris-LaGuardia Act's prohibitions, and the plaintiff's lack of standing for third-party claims. Furthermore, the court determined that the conspiracy allegations under Section 1985(3) were conclusory and lacked substantial merit.

Labor DisputePreliminary InjunctionUnion DisciplinePicket LinesNational Labor Relations Act (NLRA)Norris-LaGuardia ActStanding (Law)Conspiracy (Law)Civil Rights (42 U.S.C. § 1985(3))Tortious Interference
References
32
Case No. 08-04-00026-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2004

Ricardo Corrales and Zulema Frias v. Department of Family and Protective Services

The parents, Ricardo Corrales and Zulema Frias, appealed the termination of their parental rights concerning three of their children by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. They argued against the admission of police reports as hearsay and the court's failure to appoint the maternal grandmother as managing conservator. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the police reports admissible as cumulative evidence and upholding the jury's decision to name the Department as managing conservator. This decision was based on evidence of the parents' ongoing drug abuse, a history of abuse and neglect, and the grandmother's inability to provide a safe and stable environment for the children, despite her desire to care for them. The court reviewed the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury's finding that appointing the Department was in the children's best interest.

parental rights terminationchild conservatorshipchild neglectsubstance abuseevidentiary ruleshearsaypublic records exceptionbusiness records exceptionlegal sufficiencyjury verdict
References
27
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 00229
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2022

Matter of Patsis (Legal Interpreting Servs., Inc.--Commissioner of Labor)

The case concerns an appeal by Legal Interpreting Services, Inc. (LIS) from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board had ruled that Louiza Patsis, a linguist working for LIS, was an employee and that LIS was liable for unemployment insurance contributions. LIS contended that Patsis was an independent contractor and challenged the Board's adherence to Department of Labor guidelines. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the finding of an employment relationship. The court noted the control LIS exercised over its linguists through a written agreement and job assignments, and found no inconsistency with the Department of Labor guidelines.

unemployment insuranceemployment relationshipindependent contractorappellate divisionlabor lawunemployment benefitsstatutory interpretationsubstantial evidenceadministrative reviewlegal interpreting
References
7
Case No. 03-11-00009-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2011

Rod Bordelon, Commissioner of the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation And the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation v. Brian Fanette

The appellants, Rod Bordelon, Commissioner of the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation, and the Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation, filed a motion requesting the dismissal of their appeal. The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin, granted this motion and consequently dismissed the appeal. This decision was made in the case against Appellee Brian Fanette.

Texas Court of AppealsWorkers' Compensation DivisionAppeal DismissalAppellant MotionJudicial DistrictTravis CountyMemorandum OpinionAdministrative AgencyState GovernmentAppellate Procedure
References
0
Case No. 03-03-00355-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 08, 2004

Albert Hawkins, in His Capacity as Commissioner of Health & Human Services The Texas Health & Human Services Commission And the Texas Department of Health v. Dallas County Hospital District D/B/A Parkland Health and Hospital System

This case involves an appeal concerning the rules and formulas used to reimburse Texas teaching hospitals for graduate medical education (GME) costs from Medicaid funds. The core dispute is whether the Texas Health and Human Services Commission was legally mandated to use a specific statutory formula based on a hospital's annual actual GME costs, or if it could continue using its existing rule, which derived costs from a 1984 base-period figure adjusted for inflation, mirroring the federal Medicare approach. Dallas County Hospital District, operating Parkland Memorial Hospital, sued the department, alleging underpayment of over $72 million due to the use of the incorrect formula. The district court ruled in favor of Parkland, declaring the department's rules invalid. The appellate court affirmed this judgment, concluding that the statutory formula for reimbursement was mandatory, while the department's discretion was limited to calculating variables within that prescribed formula, not to establishing an alternative method.

Medicaid reimbursementGraduate Medical EducationTeaching HospitalsStatutory interpretationTexas Health and Human Services CommissionParkland Memorial HospitalHealthcare fundingAdministrative lawJudicial reviewHealth policy
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 9,332 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