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. 04-25-00040-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2025

Enrique Cantu and Bridgefield Casualty Insurance Company v. Javier A. Libson, Nosbil, Inc., Jose Luis Ramirez, Utica National Insurance Group, Utica National Insurance Company of Texas, Utica Mutual Insurance Company, and Republic Franklin Insurance Company

Appellants Enrique Cantu and Bridgefield Casualty Insurance Company appealed a no-evidence summary judgment. Cantu's claims of negligence per se, negligent hiring, training, retention, and negligent entrustment were affirmed. However, the summary judgment for Cantu's ordinary negligence claims was reversed and remanded. Additionally, the judgment favoring the insurance defendants (Utica National Insurance Group, Utica National Insurance Company of Texas, Utica Mutual Insurance Company, and Republic Franklin Insurance Company) was also reversed, as their motion for summary judgment was not properly heard. The case involved a collision between Cantu and Jose Luis Ramirez, an employee of Nosbil, Inc., in foggy conditions, leading to Cantu suing for negligence and insurance claims.

NegligenceAutomobile AccidentSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewProximate CauseDuty of CareBreach of DutyCausationInsurance ClaimsVicarious Liability
References
36
Case No. 09-01-511 CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2002

American National Insurance Company, and American National Property and Casualty Company v. Frank E. Cannon, II, Clifton Mark Grayless, Deborah Glenn, and Robert Westover, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Similarly Situated

This is an interlocutory appeal from a class certification order. American National Insurance Company (ANICO) and American National Property and Casualty Company (ANPAC) appealed the certification of a class action brought by former agents (Frank E. Cannon II, Clifton Mark Grayless, Deborah Glenn, and Robert Westover). The agents alleged breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Insurance Code, seeking declaratory judgments regarding non-compete provisions and repayment of advance agreements. The appellate court found that individual issues, such as the reasonableness of non-compete restrictions and reliance on oral representations for advance payments, predominated over common issues. Consequently, the court determined that the requirements for class certification under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b)(4), (b)(2), and (b)(1)(A) were not satisfied. The class certification order was vacated, and the case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Class ActionInterlocutory AppealContract DisputeNon-compete ClauseAgent AgreementsInsurance AgentsDeclaratory JudgmentStandingRipenessPredominance
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

National Casualty Co. v. Allcity Insurance

This case concerns an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County, which initially denied Allcity Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment and granted National Casualty Company's cross-motion for reimbursement. The underlying dispute involved National's request for one half of settlement and defense costs from Allcity, stemming from a personal injury action where the owner and general contractor were additional insureds on a subcontractor's general liability policy. The appellate court unanimously reversed the lower court's decision, granting Allcity's motion and denying National's cross-motion. The reversal was based on the antisubrogation rule, which precluded National from seeking recovery from Allcity, the subcontractor's workers' compensation carrier, as Allcity would not have been obligated to contribute to the settlement. Consequently, the complaint against Allcity was dismissed.

Summary JudgmentAntisubrogation RuleAdditional InsuredReimbursementDefense CostsGeneral Liability PolicyWorkers' Compensation CarrierAppellate DivisionInsurance LawPersonal Injury Action
References
2
Case No. 03-05-00401-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2006

Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association, for Paula Insurance Company, an Impaired Insurer v. National American Insurance Company and Clayton Mark Beck

This case involves an appeal from a workers' compensation decision concerning the employment status of two injured workers, Benjamin Brown and Clayton Mark Beck. The dispute centered on whether Jerry Gregory, Inc. or Hunter Trucking was their employer at the time of a trucking accident, which determines liability between National American Insurance Company (NAIC) and Texas Property and Casualty Guaranty Association (TPCIGA). The Workers' Compensation Commission initially found Gregory as the employer, making NAIC liable. However, the district court, after a jury trial under a 'modified de novo' standard, ruled that Hunter was the employer, thus making TPCIGA liable. TPCIGA appealed, arguing the dispute was a 'coverage' issue requiring substantial-evidence review, not modified de novo, and that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment, concluding that the dispute was one 'regarding compensability' and thus correctly governed by modified de novo review.

Workers' CompensationEmployer LiabilityInsurance Coverage DisputeModified De Novo ReviewSubstantial Evidence ReviewBorrowed Servant DoctrineJudicial ReviewTexas Court of AppealsTravis CountyTrucking Accident
References
60
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

American National Property and Casualty Company v. Fredrich 2 Partners, Ltd.

Fredrich 2 Partners, Ltd. (Fredrich) owned commercial buildings insured by American National Property & Casualty Company. During a severe winter storm, a pipe in a vacant, unheated unit froze and ruptured, causing water damage. American National denied the claim based on a frozen plumbing exclusion, arguing Fredrich failed to maintain heat as required by an exception. Fredrich sought declaratory judgment, asserting it maintained heat in the occupied unit, fulfilling its obligation. The trial court granted summary judgment for Fredrich, which American National appealed. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding Fredrich had done its best to maintain heat in the building by providing electricity and gas for the occupied unit.

Insurance CoverageProperty DamageFrozen PlumbingSummary JudgmentContract InterpretationPolicy ExclusionDuty to Maintain HeatVacant PropertyTexas LawAppellate Review
References
11
Case No. No. 01-06-00237-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Maryland Casualty Co. v. American Home Assurance Co.

This opinion on rehearing addresses an appeal by Maryland Casualty Company (Maryland) against American Home Assurance Company (American) and Illinois National Insurance Company (Illinois), concerning an insurance coverage dispute. Maryland challenges a summary judgment that found National Equipment Services, Inc. (NES), an additional insured under Maryland's policy, was entitled to coverage. The underlying dispute involved the settlement of a lawsuit arising from a trench collapse that killed three workers, with American and Illinois acting as subrogees for NES after settling the claims. Maryland argued that NES, and subsequently its subrogees, failed to comply with critical policy provisions, specifically timely notice of the claim and obtaining consent before settlement, thus prejudicing Maryland's ability to defend. The appellate court, guided by *National Union Fire Insurance Co. v. Crocker*, reversed the trial court's decision, concluding that Maryland was prejudiced as a matter of law due to the wholly lacking notice from NES, which prevented Maryland from exercising its right to defend or consent to the settlement. As a result, the court rendered judgment that American and Illinois take nothing on their claims against Maryland.

Insurance CoverageSubrogation ClaimSummary JudgmentAdditional Insured StatusNotice RequirementsConsent-to-Settle ClausePrejudice DefenseDuty to DefendAppellate DecisionCommercial General Liability
References
21
Case No. 3-91-239-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 1992

National Farmers Union Property and Casualty Company and Michael A. Wash v. Cirilo Degollado

Cirilo Degollado was injured in a workplace accident in 1984, leading to a workers' compensation claim against National Farmers Union Property and Casualty Company. The jury found Degollado's injury was a producing cause of total and permanent incapacity, awarding benefits and attorney's fees, which were appealed by National Farmers and attorney Michael A. Wash. Appellants argued that Degollado's subsequent stroke was the sole cause of his incapacity and challenged the attorney's fee apportionment. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that ample evidence supported the jury's finding of a producing cause and permanent incapacity. Additionally, the appellate court upheld the trial court's discretion in apportioning attorney's fees between Wash and successor counsel Eric Moebius.

Workers' CompensationProducing CauseTotal IncapacityPermanent IncapacityAttorney's FeesFee ApportionmentSole CauseTexas LawAppellate ReviewLegal Sufficiency
References
19
Case No. 03-00-00427-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2001

All American Life Insurance Company American General Life Insurance Company American National Insurance Company American National Life Insurance Company of Texas IDS Life Insurance Company And USLIFE Life Insurance Company v. Carole Keeton Rylander, Comptroller of Public Accounts of Texas And John Cornyn, Attorney General of Texas

Several insurance companies appealed a district court judgment affirming the Comptroller's assessment of premium and maintenance taxes on 'internal rollover' transactions, where policyholders transfer accumulation values within the same company for new policies. The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, At Austin, reviewed the construction of Texas Insurance Code articles 4.11 and 4.17 de novo. The court determined that 'internal rollovers' do not involve funds being 'received' or 'collected' by the insurance companies, as the funds remain within the company. Therefore, these transactions are not subject to the premium and maintenance taxes. The judgment of the district court was reversed in part, and the case was remanded for a determination of the refund amounts owed to the companies.

Insurance LawTax LawPremium TaxInternal RolloversStatutory ConstructionTexas Court of AppealsInsurance CompaniesComptrollerGross PremiumsTax Refund
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
1991-XX-XX

National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co. v. Degollado

Cirilo Degollado sustained severe abdominal injuries in a work-related accident in June 1984 while employed by Calvert Concrete Company, whose workers' compensation carrier was National Farmers Union Property and Casualty Company. Despite undergoing multiple surgeries and suffering subsequent complications, including a stroke in April 1985, Degollado's claim for total and permanent incapacity was disputed by National Farmers, who argued the stroke was the sole cause of his disability. A jury found the June 1984 injury to be a producing cause of his total and permanent incapacity, awarding compensation benefits and attorneys' fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, rejecting arguments regarding the sufficiency of evidence and the sole cause of incapacity. The court also upheld the trial court's discretionary apportionment of attorney's fees between Degollado's successive counsels, Michael A. Wash and Eric Moebius.

Workers' CompensationPersonal InjuryTotal IncapacityPermanent IncapacityProducing CauseSole CauseAttorney's FeesFee SplittingAppellate ReviewSufficiency of Evidence
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Safety Cas. Co. v. Malvoux

Randolph Malvoux, an employee of Magnolia Petroleum Company, sued Safety Casualty Company for Workman’s Compensation due to an alleged accidental injury from overheating during employment on January 29, 1946. The jury found that Malvoux sustained an injury by overheating in the course of employment, which caused paresis, and that this injury resulted in total and permanent incapacity. The appellant, Safety Casualty Company, appealed the judgment, arguing insufficient evidence. The appellate court reviewed the evidence, including medical testimony supporting the link between overheating and the activation of syphilis leading to paresis, and found it sufficient. The court also upheld the trial judge's discretion in refusing to reopen the case for additional testimony. Ultimately, all of the appellant's points were overruled, and the trial court's judgment was affirmed.

Workers' CompensationOverheating InjuryParesisSyphilis AggravationAccidental InjuryTotal IncapacityPermanent DisabilityEmployer LiabilityMedical TestimonyAppellate Review
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 13,985 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