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 Employers Insurance Ass'n v. Miller

This is a Worker's Compensation case where Texas Employers Insurance Association (T.E.I.A.) appealed an award of death benefits to Margaret Louise Miller, the surviving beneficiary of Morris Lee Miller. Morris Miller, employed by the Florence Drane Estate, died on December 18, 1976, after being found burned in a trash pit on the property where his routine duties included burning trash. T.E.I.A. disputed whether Mr. Miller was an 'employee' at the time of his death and if his death resulted from an injury in the course and scope of his employment. A jury found in favor of Mrs. Miller, and the trial court entered judgment for maximum death benefits and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, overruling all of T.E.I.A.'s points of error.

Worker's CompensationDeath BenefitsScope of EmploymentAverage Weekly WageLump Sum Attorney's FeesJury MisconductTexas Civil StatutesIndustrial Accident BoardEmployer LiabilityBeneficiary Rights
References
8
Case No. 13-17-00346-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2019

Audrey Nickerson v. Julio Pineda and Unique Employment, LLC, Unique Employment Services, Unique Employment I, LTD, D/B/A Unique Employment Services

Audrey Nickerson, an employee of the City of Corpus Christi, sued Julio Pineda, a temporary worker, and Unique Employment Services for negligence after Pineda, operating a City-owned backhoe, caused an injury. Appellees filed a plea to the jurisdiction, which the trial court granted. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of claims against Pineda, determining he qualified as a government employee under the Texas Tort Claims Act and was therefore immune from suit. However, the court reversed the dismissal of claims against Unique Employment Services, concluding that the borrowed-employee doctrine, on which Unique relied, is an affirmative defense to liability and not a jurisdictional matter properly addressed in a plea to the jurisdiction. The case against Unique was remanded for further proceedings.

Plea to the JurisdictionGovernmental ImmunityTexas Tort Claims ActElection of RemediesBorrowed Employee DoctrineNegligenceTemporary StaffingVicarious LiabilityAppellate ReviewSubject Matter Jurisdiction
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 01, 1995

Campbell v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n

Margaret Campbell, as executrix of her deceased husband Danny Campbell's estate, sued Houston Independent School District and several insurance entities for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, DTPA violations, and Insurance Code violations. Danny Campbell, an HISD employee, ingested formaldehyde from his thermos at work, leading to his death. The defendants denied workers' compensation coverage, claiming it was not an "on-the-job injury" due to a "personal animosity" exception. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants on grounds of no breach of duty, statute of limitations, and governmental immunity. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Campbell's injury occurred in the course of employment and whether the denial of payment was reasonable. The court also found the claims were within the statute of limitations and that the defendants were not entitled to governmental immunity. The case was remanded for a trial on the merits.

Workers' CompensationGood Faith and Fair DealingSummary Judgment ReviewAppellate CourtInsurance Bad FaithCourse of EmploymentPersonal Animosity ExceptionStatute of Limitations DefenseGovernmental ImmunityFormaldehyde Poisoning
References
20
Case No. 04-08-00183-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 24, 2009

Midwest Employers Casualty Company on Behalf of Terry English v. Charles Harpole, Jim Carroll, Alan Kwast, Albert Lopez and Brock Pittman

This appeal examines a negligence claim brought by Midwest Employers Casualty Company, on behalf of injured football coach Terry English, against several referees, including Charles Harpole. English sustained a severe head injury after Harpole collided with him in a designated restricted area during a high school football game. Midwest, the worker's compensation insurer for English's employer, argued the referees had a duty to enforce safety rules and that Harpole failed to exercise reasonable care. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the referees, ruling that Harpole owed no duty to foresee English's presence in the restricted area, as English was in violation of game rules, and there was no evidence of a breach of duty by the referees.

AppealSummary JudgmentNegligenceDuty of CareForeseeabilitySports LawFootball RefereePersonal InjuryWorker's CompensationTexas Law
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Moore

Herbert B. Moore, an employee of Greta Oil Company, tragically died in a car accident in Louisiana while engaged in a "scouting" mission for his employer. His dependents, Mrs. Loula Moore and her sons, filed a worker's compensation claim against the Texas Employers’ Insurance Association, Greta Oil Company's compensation carrier. The defense challenged Moore's employment status and the extraterritorial applicability of the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. A jury found in favor of the plaintiffs, confirming Moore's employment with Greta and his death in the course of duty. The appellate court subsequently reformed the judgment concerning financial calculations but ultimately affirmed the core decision, upholding the award of compensation to the appellees.

Workman's CompensationExtraterritorial EmploymentTexas LawLouisiana AccidentEmployee Status DisputeOil IndustryJury VerdictContract InterpretationInsurance LiabilityAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zavala-Nava v. A.C. Employment, Inc.

Jose Zavala-Nava, an employee furnished by A.C. Employment, Inc. (Ajax) to Centron Corporation, sustained severe burns due to acetone fumes while cleaning work clothes. He filed a common-law negligence suit against both companies, alleging joint employment and negligence. Both defendants moved for summary judgment, claiming workers' compensation coverage as the exclusive remedy. The trial court granted both motions. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment for A.C. Employment, Inc., finding it was a workers' compensation subscriber. However, the court reversed and remanded the summary judgment for Centron Corporation, as the summary judgment proof did not show Centron to be a subscriber under Texas Workers' Compensation statutes, despite Ajax providing coverage that named Centron as an 'alternate employer' and explicitly stating it was not intended to satisfy Centron's duty to secure its own obligations.

Workers' CompensationCommon LawNegligenceSummary JudgmentEmployer LiabilityAlternate EmployerSubscriber StatusTexas LawPersonal InjuryEmployment Agency
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Clingan v. Employers Casualty Co.

M. W. Clingan, father of the deceased Michael Clingan, sought to recover death benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act from Employers Casualty Company. Michael, a graduate student and teaching assistant at Texas Tech University, died after being shot while assisting in moving laboratory equipment for cleaning, an activity the plaintiff argued constituted covered employment. The Industrial Accident Board initially awarded benefits, but the district court granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict for the defendant. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that Michael was not in covered employment at the time of his death, as his actions were deemed for his own research benefit and not within the scope of his defined teaching or janitorial duties.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsScope of EmploymentGraduate StudentTeaching AssistantLaboratory SafetyJudgment N.O.V.Statutory InterpretationEmployer LiabilityInsurance Coverage
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

New York City Transit Authority v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

The New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a June 16, 2009, determination by the New York State Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). PERB's determination reversed an earlier administrative law judge's decision, finding that the NYCTA had committed an improper labor practice by unilaterally implementing new standards for off-duty secondary employment without negotiating with the Transport Workers Union of Greater New York, Local 100. PERB directed the NYCTA to make whole certain employees and subsequently filed a cross-petition to enforce its order. The court found that PERB's determination was supported by substantial evidence, noting that an employer's restriction on nonworking time is generally a mandatory subject of negotiations under the Taylor Law. Consequently, the court confirmed PERB's determination, denied the NYCTA's petition, dismissed the proceeding on the merits, and granted PERB's cross-petition for enforcement of its remedial order.

Public EmploymentLabor RelationsCollective BargainingImproper Labor PracticeOff-Duty Secondary EmploymentCivil Service LawTaylor LawJudicial ReviewSubstantial EvidenceAdministrative Law
References
21
Case No. 01-93-00152-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 1995

Campbell v. TEXAS EMPLOYERS'INS. ASS'N

This case involves a claim of lack of good faith and fair dealing against workers' compensation insurance carriers. Danny Campbell, an employee of the Houston Independent School District, became severely ill and later died after ingesting formaldehyde from his thermos at work. His wife, Margaret Campbell, sued the insurance carriers (Texas Employers' Insurance Association, Employers Casualty Company, and Employers' National Risk Management Services, Inc.) for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, DTPA violations, and Insurance Code violations, after they denied coverage. The trial court granted summary judgment for the carriers, but the Court of Appeals reversed this decision. The appellate court found genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Campbell's injury was sustained in the course of his employment and whether the denial of payment was reasonable, and it rejected the carriers' defenses of statute of limitations and governmental immunity. The cause was remanded for a trial on the merits.

Workers' CompensationBad Faith ClaimUnfair DealingSummary Judgment ReversalCourse of EmploymentPersonal Animosity ExceptionStatute of LimitationsGovernmental ImmunityInsurance Coverage DisputeToxic Ingestion
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Smith v. Waterview Nursing Home

A 63-year-old nurse’s aide sustained work-related injuries and her workers’ compensation case was established. She was offered a light-duty position by her employer, but her daughter informed the employer that claimant could not work. The Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Board subsequently concluded that by rejecting the offer, claimant had voluntarily withdrawn from employment and denied her further benefits. The Appellate Division reversed this decision, finding that the employer failed to provide substantial evidence regarding the specifics of the light-duty position, its requirements, duties, or suitability for the claimant's medical limitations. The court held that without such proof, the Board's finding of voluntary withdrawal was not supported by substantial evidence. The matter was remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for further proceedings consistent with the court's decision.

Workers' CompensationLight-Duty AssignmentVoluntary WithdrawalLabor MarketMedical LimitationsSubstantial EvidenceReversalRemittiturNurse's AideEmployment Benefits
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 17,222 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