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

Cope Construction Co. v. Power

Randy Power suffered injuries on June 13, 1975, while riding on a tailgate of a truck owned by Cope Construction Co. and driven by Herman Yeager. Power filed a workers' compensation claim and subsequently a common-law tort claim in Galveston County against Cope Construction Co. and Herman Yeager. Cope's carrier, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, also initiated a suit in Galveston County regarding Power's employment status. The appellants (Cope and Yeager) filed a plea of privilege, which was controverted by Power. Following motions to consolidate and reconsider, which were denied, the trial court overruled the plea of privilege. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that the appellants had waived their plea of privilege through actions inconsistent with maintaining it, specifically by actively participating in and challenging the consolidation of the cases.

Plea of PrivilegeWaiver of VenueWorkers' CompensationTort ClaimMotion to ConsolidateAppellate ProcedureTexas LawCivil ProcedureVenue StatuteJudicial Conduct
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Southwestern Indemnity Co. v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n

This case involves an appeal from an order sustaining a plea of privilege filed by the Texas Employers’ Insurance Association (TEIA) to be sued in Dallas County, its established residence, rather than McLennan County where the suit was originally filed. The appellant, an insurance company, sought indemnity for a workmen’s compensation settlement concerning a deceased employee. The central legal issue was whether TEIA constitutes a private corporation or a state agency for venue purposes under Texas law. The court, analyzing Article 8308, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.Stats., determined that TEIA possesses all characteristics of a private corporation, including the ability to sue and be sued, elected directors, and profit distribution. Consequently, TEIA was deemed a 'person' entitled to claim venue privilege in its county of residence. The trial court’s decision to sustain TEIA's plea of privilege and transfer the case to Dallas County was affirmed, as the appellant failed to demonstrate an exception to the general venue statute.

Workers' CompensationVenuePlea of PrivilegeCorporation StatusState AgencyTexas LawCivil ProcedureStatutory InterpretationDomicileIndemnity
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tullos v. Eaton Corp.

Tullos filed a cause of action against Eaton Corporation and James Herman Gibson in Angelina County following an injury caused by allegedly defective logging equipment. Gibson sought to transfer the case to Trinity County via a plea of privilege. The court determined that venue was proper in Angelina County for Eaton Corporation and that Gibson was a necessary party. This was due to the intertwined nature of the causes of action, particularly concerning comparative causation and the allocation of damages among multiple defendants. Consequently, the court reversed the order sustaining Gibson's plea of privilege, mandating that the entire case be tried in Angelina County.

VenuePlea of PrivilegeNecessary PartiesJoint LiabilityComparative CausationProducts LiabilityNegligenceDefective EquipmentWorkers’ Compensation LawTexas Civil Practice
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

West Texas Utilities Co. v. Wills

West Texas Utilities Company, the appellant, appealed an order that denied its plea of privilege to move a slander suit from Tom Green County to Taylor County. The appellee, an employee, accused the company's chief engineer, W. E. Huss, of slandering him by falsely claiming he was faking an injury to defraud the company and its insurer, a claim made after the employee's involvement in union organization. The court found that the statements were slanderous per se, damaging the employee's occupation, and that Huss acted on behalf of the company, with his actions later ratified. The appellant contended that actionable slander was not proven and that Huss was not acting in his corporate capacity. The judgment of the trial court, which upheld venue in Tom Green County, was affirmed.

SlanderPlea of PrivilegeVenue DisputeLabor Union ActivitiesWorkers' CompensationEmployer LiabilityCorporate AgentPer Se SlanderEmployment LawTexas Civil Statutes
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Workers' Compensation Assigned Risk Pool v. Perry-Packard Co.

The Texas Workers’ Compensation Assigned Risk Pool sued Perry-Packard Company and Collier Perry in Travis County for unpaid workers' compensation insurance premiums. The defendants filed pleas of privilege to transfer the case to Milam County, their county of residence, which the district court granted. The appellant argued that the contract stipulated performance in Travis County, satisfying subdivision 5(a) of Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 1995. The court determined that the contract's provision for payment in Travis County, as an option for the Pool in case of default, fulfilled the 'one particular county' requirement of the statute, distinguishing it from cases where multiple undetermined counties were options. Therefore, the appellate court reversed the lower court's judgment.

Workers' CompensationInsurance PremiumsVenuePlea of PrivilegeContract LawTravis CountyMilam CountyTexas Civil StatutesSubdivision 5(a)Option Clauses
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Farm Air Service, Inc. v. Houston Fire & Casualty Insurance Co.

The case involves an appeal from an order overruling a plea of privilege. Houston Fire- & Casualty Insurance Company, the appellee, sued Farm Air Service, Inc., the appellant, to collect excess premiums on workmen's compensation insurance policies. Farm Air Service, Inc. sought to have the case moved to its domicile in Jefferson County, Texas. However, Houston Fire- & Casualty Insurance Company argued that venue was proper in Travis County, Texas, under Article 1995 of Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St., because the insurance contract was made through the Texas Workmen’s Compensation Assigned Risk Pool, which maintained an office and fund in Austin (Travis County). The court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the cause of action, or part thereof, arose in Travis County due to the contractual activities of the Assigned Risk Pool in Austin. This established that venue was appropriately retained in Travis County.

VenuePlea of PrivilegeInsurance LawWorkmen's CompensationContract LawTexas Civil ProcedureAppellate ReviewCorporate LiabilityPremium CollectionAssigned Risk Pool
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n v. Orozco

This is an appeal from an interlocutory judgment concerning a plea of privilege in a worker’s compensation case. Appellant, Texas Employers’ Insurance Association (TEIA), sought to be sued in Lubbock County, where the injury occurred, while appellee, Jose T. Orozco (Orozco), filed suit in Webb County, his county of residence. The trial court in Webb County overruled TEIA’s plea of privilege, a decision which is being appealed here. Previous related litigation involving the same parties had affirmed the transfer of the case to Webb County, and the Supreme Court dismissed that appeal for want of jurisdiction. Citing precedents like Hagemeister v. Vanity Fair Properties and Pinney v. Cook, the court emphasized that a final judgment on a plea of privilege is conclusive on the issue of venue. Therefore, the court affirmed the order of the trial court overruling TEIA’s plea of privilege.

Venue DisputePlea of PrivilegeInterlocutory JudgmentRes JudicataWorkers Compensation LawAppellate ReviewTexas LawCourt JurisdictionStatutory Interpretation
References
4
Case No. 16885
Regular Panel Decision

Parks & Wildlife Department of the State v. Heldenfels Bros., Inc.

This case involves a consolidated venue appeal stemming from a fatal automobile collision in McMullen County, Texas, on December 8, 1978, between vehicles driven by James E. Daughtrey, Jr. (State game warden) and Gerald C. Huebotter (Heldenfels Brothers employee). Cynthia A. Daughtrey, widow of James, sued Heldenfels and Deborah Lynn Huebotter (Gerald's widow) in cause 922; the State intervened for workers' compensation subrogation. Subsequently, Deborah Lynn Huebotter sued the State in cause 936 for damages, where the State counterclaimed and brought a third-party action against Heldenfels. The trial court sustained pleas of privilege by Heldenfels and Huebotter in cause 922 and by Heldenfels in cause 936. This opinion, on a motion for rehearing, addresses the State's appeal concerning the plea of privilege of Heldenfels in cause 936. The court finds that Heldenfels waived its plea of privilege in cause 936 by filing a non-compliant "special appearance" and reverses the trial court's order. The appeal regarding Heldenfels' plea in cause 922 is dismissed due to the State's failure to file a controverting plea.

VenuePlea of PrivilegeWaiverSpecial AppearanceGeneral AppearanceTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureWorkers' Compensation SubrogationNegligence Per SeCourse and Scope of EmploymentWrongful Death
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States Fire Insurance v. Alvarez

United States Fire Insurance Company (U.S. Fire) appealed an order from a Texas trial court that overruled its plea of privilege in a workers’ compensation case. Rosa and Manuel Alvarez had initiated the suit in Webb County to appeal an Industrial Accident Board award. U.S. Fire contended that venue should be in Dallas County, its place of residence, arguing the injured worker, Tranquelino Alvarez, was an exempt farm laborer and not covered by the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. The plaintiffs asserted that venue was proper in Webb County due to the worker's residence there at the time of injury and death, as per specific provisions of Texas statutes. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's ruling, concluding that proof of a 'covered employee' status was an issue for the trial on the merits, not a prerequisite venue fact in a plea of privilege hearing for a workers' compensation case.

workers' compensationvenueplea of privilegefarm laborer exemptioncovered employeeappellate procedureTexas lawjurisdictionstatutory interpretationIndustrial Accident Board
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re an Application to Quash a Subpoena Duces Tecum in Grand Jury Proceedings

The New York Court of Appeals held that a hospital under Grand Jury investigation for alleged crimes against patients (e.g., "no coding") cannot assert physician-patient or social worker-client privileges, or the patient’s right to privacy, to quash subpoenas for medical records. The court reasoned that these privileges are intended to protect patients, not to shield potential criminals. Additionally, the conditional privilege for material prepared for litigation (CPLR 3101 [d]) does not apply to Grand Jury subpoenas. The decision affirmed the denial of motions to quash subpoenas related to patients Maria M. and Daisy S., emphasizing the broad investigative powers of the Grand Jury.

Grand JurySubpoena Duces TecumPhysician-Patient PrivilegeSocial Worker-Client PrivilegePatient PrivacyMaterial Prepared for LitigationHospital InvestigationMedicaid Fraud ControlCriminal ActivityNo Coding
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 1,104 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