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. 03-10-00709-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 2011

Green Tree Servicing, LLC, as Authorized Servicing Agent for Conseco Finance Servicing Corporation v. Travis County

Green Tree Servicing, LLC appealed a post-answer default judgment concerning ad valorem taxes on mobile homes. The original suit was filed by Travis County and other entities against Conseco Finance Servicing Corporation, later substituted with Green Tree. Green Tree failed to appear at trial, resulting in a default judgment. Green Tree filed a motion for new trial, asserting its failure to appear was due to an accident or mistake (attorney transition) and that it had a meritorious defense, arguing that as a repossessing lienholder and not an owner, it was not liable for the taxes under Texas Tax Code Ann. § 32.07. The appellate court applied the Craddock test and found that Green Tree satisfied all three elements. The court adopted the interpretation that a repossessing lienholder is not considered an 'owner' under the tax code. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial.

Post-answer default judgmentAd valorem taxesMobile homesLienholder liabilityProperty ownershipMeritorious defenseCraddock testNew trialStatutory interpretationTexas Tax Code
References
22
Case No. 14-09-00105-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 2009

in Re Investment Capital Corporation and Service Corporation International

Relators Investment Capital Corporation (ICC) and Service Corporation International (SCI) filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Kathleen Stone of Probate Court No. 1 of Harris County to grant leave to designate SCI Funeral & Cemetary Purchasing Cooperative, Inc. as a responsible third party in a wrongful death suit. The underlying suit was initiated by the widow of Harold Israel, who suffered fatal injuries after falling in a parking garage. The trial court denied the relators' motion to designate SCI Funeral as a responsible third party. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals denied the petition for writ of mandamus, concluding that the relators had an adequate remedy at law and that the case did not present the extraordinary circumstances necessary to justify mandamus relief, distinguishing it from precedent such as In re Arthur Andersen.

Mandamus ReliefResponsible Third Party DesignationTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeAppellate RemedyWrongful Death SuitNegligence ClaimsGross NegligencePremises LiabilityWorkers' Compensation ActAbuse of Discretion
References
10
Case No. 09-0941
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 17, 2011

Service Corporation International and Sci Texas Funeral Services, Inc., D/B/A Mont Meta Memorial Park v. Juanita G. Guerra, Julie Ann Ramirez, Gracie Little and Mary Esther Martinez

The case involves Service Corporation International and SCI Texas Funeral Services, Inc., which operated Mont Meta Memorial Park, burying Marcos Guerra in a plot previously sold to another party. Despite the family's refusal, the cemetery disinterred and moved Mr. Guerra's body. His widow, Juanita G. Guerra, and daughters sued both corporations for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and trespass. The Supreme Court of Texas found insufficient evidence to support the liability findings against SCI International and the mental anguish damages awarded to the daughters. The Court also ruled that the trial court improperly admitted evidence of other lawsuits. Consequently, the judgment was reversed and rendered in part, and Mrs. Guerra's claim against SCI Texas was remanded for a new trial.

Cemetery DisputeWrongful DisintermentMental Anguish DamagesCorporate VeilVicarious LiabilityEvidentiary ErrorIrrelevant EvidenceOther Acts EvidencePunitive DamagesTexas Supreme Court
References
32
Case No. 13-10-00498-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 11, 2012

Service Corporation International and Sci Texas Funeral Services, Inc. v. Leticia Leal

This case involved an appeal from a trial court judgment that found Service Corporation International and SCI Texas Funeral Services, Inc. liable for fraud concerning burial plots. The appellees, families of Rodolfo Garza and Charles Rogers, alleged fraud and sought damages for mental anguish. The jury found fraud but also found that most appellees had not filed within the four-year statute of limitations, a finding the trial court disregarded. On appeal, the Thirteenth District Court of Texas reversed and rendered judgment in favor of the appellants, concluding that all claims except Leticia Leal's were barred by limitations and that there was legally insufficient evidence for mental anguish damages for most appellees. Consequently, the awards for actual and exemplary damages were also reversed.

Fraudulent ConcealmentDiscovery RuleStatute of LimitationsMental Anguish DamagesExemplary DamagesBurial DisputesCemetery PracticesCorporate LiabilityTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeAppellate Procedure
References
25
Case No. 14-18-00083-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 17, 2019

James Construction Group, LLC, Primoris Services Corporation v. Westlake Chemical Corporation

James Construction Group, LLC and Primoris Services Corporation appealed a judgment concerning contract claims with Westlake Chemical Corporation. Chemical had initially sued James for breach of a construction contract, citing safety violations and a failure to indemnify. The jury found James liable for breach of contract and indemnification, leading to damages and attorney's fees awarded against Primoris due to a guaranty. On appeal, the court affirmed the jury's findings on James's liability and the attorney's fees against Primoris. Crucially, the court reversed the trial court's judgment awarding James damages on its counterclaim, clarifying that a contractual waiver of consequential damages serves as an affirmative defense rather than a basis for a breach-of-contract claim.

Contract LawBreach of ContractConstruction ContractIndemnificationGuaranty AgreementAttorney's FeesConsequential DamagesWaiver of DamagesConditions PrecedentSubstantial Compliance
References
136
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cebcor Service Corp. v. Landscape Design and Construction, Inc.

This case involves Cebcor Service Corporation appealing a trial court's judgment that held them liable for a default judgment previously rendered against Consolidated Employment Benefit Service Corporation, also known as Cebcor Service Corporation. Cebcor argued it was never served in the underlying action and that the alter ego theory, which linked it to Consolidated, was irrelevant and improperly pleaded. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that service on an alter ego constitutes valid service. The court further determined that the alter ego theory was properly pleaded and relevant to the issue of service of process in a bill of review case, and noted that Cebcor had waived challenges to the original service on Consolidated.

Alter EgoDefault JudgmentService of ProcessBill of ReviewCorporate LiabilityTexas LawAppellate ReviewCorporate VeilProcedural IssuesDue Diligence
References
13
Case No. 03-08-00766-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 2010

Service Lloyds Insurance Company v. American Alternative Insurance Corporation

This workers' compensation case involves an appeal by Service Lloyds Insurance Company against American Alternative Insurance Corporation (AAIC). The Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Workers' Compensation, ordered Service Lloyds to reimburse AAIC for benefits erroneously paid to an injured employee, Emmit Hines, for whom Service Lloyds was the liable carrier. Service Lloyds argued that a workers' compensation carrier cannot be a 'subclaimant' under Texas Labor Code section 409.009 and that the Division lacked jurisdiction over such a claim. The district court affirmed the Division's decision. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment, concluding that a workers' compensation carrier can indeed be a subclaimant and the Division has jurisdiction to resolve such independently-raised subclaims.

Workers' CompensationInsurance LawSubrogationStatutory InterpretationTexas CourtsAppellate ReviewAdministrative LawReimbursementInsurance DisputeJurisdiction
References
20
Case No. 2018-06-0810
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 05, 2018

Smith, LaShonda v. Macy's Corporate Services

Ms. Lashonda Smith sought temporary disability and medical benefits after sustaining an injury on a Safe Harbor bus while returning home from work at Macy's. Macy's denied the claim, arguing the injury did not occur within the course and scope of employment, as they did not provide or pay for the bus service. The Court evaluated whether Macy's made a 'deliberate and substantial payment' for the transportation, as required for an exception to the 'going and coming' rule. Despite Macy's facilitating the service and deducting a nominal fee from employees' paychecks, the Court found insufficient evidence that Macy's deliberately and substantially paid for Ms. Smith's transportation. Therefore, the Court denied Ms. Smith's request for workers’ compensation benefits, concluding she is unlikely to prevail at a final hearing.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingCourse and Scope of EmploymentGoing and Coming Rule ExceptionEmployer-Provided TransportationBus AccidentTemporary DisabilityMedical BenefitsRecruiting Services AgreementPayroll Deduction
References
10
Case No. 02A01-9508-CV-00169
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 1996

Brian Wolney and wife, Meliaa Wolney v. LIsa M. Emmons and Wells Fargo Armored Service Corporation

Brian Wolney and his wife, Melissa Wolney, sued Wells Fargo Armored Service Corporation (WFA) and Lisa M. Emmons for personal injuries Wolney sustained in a vehicle accident. Wolney, a guard for Wells Fargo Guard Service (WFG), was injured while riding as a passenger in a WFA vehicle driven by Emmons during an assignment for WFA. The trial court granted summary judgment for WFA, finding Wolney was a statutory employee under the Workers' Compensation Act, thus barring his tort claim. The Wolneys appealed, arguing he was an independent contractor. The appellate court affirmed, citing WFA's right to control Wolney's work, termination rights, equipment provision, and scheduling, consistent with a statutory employee relationship.

Statutory EmployeeIndependent Contractor StatusSummary Judgment AppealPersonal Injury DamagesEmployer's Right to ControlExclusive Remedy RuleTennessee Workers' Compensation ActMotor Vehicle AccidentSecurity Guard EmploymentAppellate Court Review
References
14
Case No. Appeal No. 02A01-9508-CV-00169
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 1996

Brian Wolney and wife, Melissa Wolney v. Lisa M. Emmons and Wells Fargo Armored Service Corporation

This case addresses an appeal concerning a personal injury claim brought by Brian Wolney and his wife against Wells Fargo Armored Service Corporation (WFA) and Lisa M. Emmons. Wolney, a guard for Wells Fargo Guard Service (WFG), was injured while working an assignment for WFA. The core issue was whether Wolney was a statutory employee of WFA under the Workers' Compensation Act, which would bar his tort claim against WFA. The trial court granted partial summary judgment for WFA, finding Wolney to be a statutory employee. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision, emphasizing WFA's right to control Wolney's work, the right to terminate him, and the provision of equipment, despite his employment contract with WFG. The court concluded that under the remedial construction of the Workers' Compensation Act, Wolney qualified as a statutory employee of WFA.

Statutory EmployeeWorkers' Compensation ActSummary JudgmentPersonal InjuryRight to ControlIndependent ContractorExclusive RemedyAppellate ReviewEmployment RelationshipGuard Services
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 12,035 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