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. ADJ1996953
Regular
May 18, 2012

SALVADOR BECERRA vs. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICES c/o CANNON COCHRAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by Salvador Becerra against Consolidated Disposal Services. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition and the accompanying administrative law judge's report. Finding no grounds to disturb the original decision, the Board denied the Petition for Removal. This denial means the administrative law judge's prior decision stands.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law Judge ReportDeny RemovalConsolidated Disposal ServicesCannon Cochran Management ServicesSalvadore BecerraADJ1996953LAO 0845259Removal Order
References
11
Case No. 07-99-0508-CR; 07-99-0509-CR
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2001

Becerra, Alfonso, Sr. v. State

Alfonso Becerra, Sr. appealed the revocation of his community supervision for two felony DWI charges. He argued that his supervision terms were suspended during the alleged violations and that the State's motions to revoke lacked sufficient notice. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the probationary period remained in effect and was not suspended, and that the State's motions provided adequate notice of the alleged violations, which included public intoxication and alcohol consumption. The court emphasized that probation revocation proceedings are administrative, and the burden of proof lies with the State to show a violation by a preponderance of the evidence. The court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Becerra's probation.

Revocation of Community SupervisionFelony DWIProbation ViolationSufficiency of NoticeAbuse of DiscretionRetroactive OrdersAppellate ReviewCriminal ProcedureTexas LawPublic Intoxication
References
24
Case No. ADJ8625134
Regular
Mar 19, 2018

ARNULFO GONZALEZ OLVERA vs. SALVADOR BECERRA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied a Petition for Removal in the case of Olvera v. Becerra. Removal is an extraordinary remedy requiring a showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm that reconsideration cannot cure. The WCAB found that the petitioner did not meet this high burden. Therefore, the petition was denied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmReconsiderationWCJ ReportAdministrative Law JudgeCortez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
2
Case No. 13-03-338-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 29, 2006

Autozone, Inc. v. Salvador Reyes

Salvador Reyes, a 62-year-old former AutoZone employee, sued AutoZone for age discrimination after his termination following a sexual harassment complaint. A jury awarded Reyes substantial damages for back pay, compensatory, and punitive damages, which the trial court reduced. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas affirmed the finding of age discrimination and the compensatory damages, finding sufficient evidence of age as a motivating factor and mental anguish. However, the court modified the back pay award by offsetting interim earnings and deleted the punitive damages award due to insufficient evidence of malice or reckless indifference.

Age DiscriminationWrongful TerminationSexual Harassment PolicyBack PayCompensatory DamagesPunitive DamagesEmployment LawTexas Labor CodeLegal SufficiencyJury Instructions
References
49
Case No. 2024-60-2310
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2025

Hernandez, Ambar Salvador v. Redkap Distribution

Ambar Salvador Hernandez sustained a left wrist injury while employed by Redkap Distribution in 2019, leading to diagnoses of carpal and cubital tunnel syndrome. Treating physicians, including Dr. Douglas Weikert and Dr. Douglas, assessed a 3% permanent impairment rating, which Ms. Salvador Hernandez contested due to persistent pain but failed to provide objective medical evidence to refute. The Court upheld the doctors' 3% impairment rating, ruling that the employee's personal testimony alone was insufficient to override the medical presumption. As a result, the Court awarded Ms. Salvador Hernandez $5,320.22 in permanent partial disability benefits. Furthermore, she was granted lifetime open medical benefits for her left wrist injury, with continued treatment by Dr. Douglas.

Permanent Partial DisabilityLeft Wrist InjuryCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCubital Tunnel SyndromeMedical BenefitsImpairment RatingCompensation OrderTennessee LawBurden of ProofMedical Evidence
References
0
Case No. ADJ 7620353
Regular
Feb 06, 2012

HECTOR BECERRA vs. CITY OF FRESNO

In this case, both the applicant, Hector Becerra, and the defendant, City of Fresno, sought reconsideration of a prior decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted both petitions. This grant allows the WCAB to conduct a more thorough review of the factual and legal issues. The purpose of this reconsideration is to ensure a complete understanding of the record and to issue a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetitions for ReconsiderationGranting ReconsiderationStatutory Time ConstraintsFactual and Legal IssuesJust and Reasoned DecisionFurther ProceedingsOffice of the CommissionersSan FranciscoDecision After Reconsideration
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

AutoZone, Inc. v. Reyes

Salvador Reyes, a 62-year-old former employee, sued AutoZone, Inc. for age discrimination after his termination, allegedly for violating the company's sexual harassment policy. A jury found in favor of Reyes, awarding significant damages, but the trial court reduced the award. The appellate court further modified the judgment, decreasing the back pay award and deleting punitive damages, while affirming the judgment in all other respects. The court concluded that there was legally sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that age was a motivating factor in Reyes's discharge, citing a manager's direct statements and disparate treatment of younger employees with similar policy violations. Challenges regarding jury instructions and the calculation of compensatory damages were also addressed and largely overruled.

Age discriminationSexual harassment policyWrongful terminationTexas Labor CodeCompensatory damagesBack payPunitive damagesLegal sufficiency reviewJury instructionsDisparate treatment
References
53
Case No. 2020-02-0318
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 07, 2021

Enriquez, Salvador v. Defender Services, Inc.

Salvador Enriquez sought court-ordered left-knee surgery recommended by his physician after a work-related fall in September 2019. His employer, Defender Services, Inc., disputed the causal link between the injury and the need for surgery. The Court, after an expedited hearing, denied the request, finding that Mr. Enriquez had not presented sufficient evidence to prove the surgery was primarily related to his work injury. The decision highlighted conflicting medical opinions from Dr. Larry Waldrop, the treating physician, and Dr. William Hovis, an independent medical examiner, with the Court adopting Dr. Hovis's view that the surgery was primarily needed due to pre-existing arthritis and congenital issues, although the work injury aggravated the condition. The Court also noted the absence of a valid panel physician, which removed the presumption of correctness for Dr. Waldrop's opinion.

Knee InjurySurgery DenialMedical CausationPre-existing ConditionExpedited HearingIndependent Medical ExaminationTreating PhysicianPanel PhysicianTennessee LawArthritis
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

ACME BOOT CO. v. MONTENEGRO

Salvador Montenegro, an employee of Acme Boot Company, was discharged after injuring his back on the job and filing a workers' compensation claim. Despite a history of good performance, his evaluations worsened after the injury, and he was eventually terminated under a six-month layoff policy, even though Acme hired other employees for positions he was qualified for. Montenegro sued Acme, alleging wrongful termination for exercising his rights under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act (Article 8307c). A jury found that Acme discharged Montenegro for exercising his rights, and that the discharge was willful and malicious, awarding him $40,000 actual and $100,000 exemplary damages. Acme appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence for the jury's verdict, the exemplary damages, and the assessment of prejudgment interest. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings of wrongful discharge and malice, upholding the exemplary damages, and concluding that Article 8307c cases are personal injury cases subject to prejudgment interest on the entire award.

Wrongful TerminationWorkers' Compensation RetaliationTexas Labor LawExemplary DamagesPrejudgment InterestFactual Sufficiency of EvidenceMalicious ActCircumstantial EvidenceEmployment LawAppellate Review
References
25
Case No. ADJ8905657
Regular
Nov 27, 2013

SALVADOR SANCHEZ vs. ANTONIO RAMOS CONCRETE, AMTRUST

This case involved an applicant, Salvador Sanchez, and defendants Antonio Ramos Concrete and Amtrust. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was filed from a non-final order, specifically an Order Denying Change of Venue, which does not determine substantive rights. The WCAB also denied the petition for removal, finding no showing of substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The defendant's attorney was admonished for filing a petition challenging a non-final order.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderSubstantive RightLiabilityInterlocutory ProceduralEvidentiary DecisionsRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmInadequate Remedy
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 91 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