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. 03-23-00316-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 16, 2025

City of Killeen, Texas and Ground Game Texas v. Bell County, Texas; The 27th Judicial District Attorney's Office; And the Bell County Attorney's Office

The City of Killeen, Texas, and Ground Game Texas appealed the trial court's denial of their pleas to the jurisdiction. The underlying lawsuit, filed by Bell County, the 27th Judicial District Attorney’s Office, and the Bell County Attorney’s Office, challenged the constitutionality and validity of a Killeen ordinance decriminalizing misdemeanor marijuana possession. Appellants argued that the appellees lacked standing and that governmental immunity barred the suit. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order, concluding that the District Attorney’s Office had standing due to the ordinance's interference with its prosecutorial discretion and duties. It also found that governmental immunity was waived for challenges to an ordinance's validity and for concurrent claims for injunctive relief under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act.

Decriminalization OrdinanceMarijuana PossessionPlea to the JurisdictionGovernmental ImmunityStandingProsecutorial DiscretionUniform Declaratory Judgments ActTexas Local Government CodeTexas Health & Safety CodeTexas Code of Criminal Procedure
References
29
Case No. 13-14-00293-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 26, 2015

San Patricio County, Texas v. Nueces County, Texas and Nueces County Appraisal District

This is a reply brief filed by San Patricio County, Texas, in an appeal against Nueces County and Nueces County Appraisal District. The core issue revolves around unresolved boundary disputes between the two counties, leading to double taxation for industrial taxpayers like Occidental Petroleum Company. San Patricio County argues that the Nueces County District Court lacked jurisdiction and venue, and erred in granting summary judgment without determining the boundary line. They assert that the 2003 Judgment, which declared 'natural and artificial modifications to the shoreline of San Patricio County shall form a part of San Patricio County,' includes docks, piers, and similar facilities as part of their county, consistent with maritime law and riparian rights. The county seeks reversal of the trial court's decision, either for transfer back to a neutral Refugio County District Court, or for a judgment declaring the disputed properties within San Patricio County's jurisdiction, or for a remand to resolve factual issues concerning the boundary.

County Boundary DisputeJurisdictionVenueSummary JudgmentCollateral Attack2003 Judgment InterpretationShoreline ModificationsDocks and PiersRiparian RightsTaxation Dispute
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. District Attorney's Office of New York

Thomas Jones, currently incarcerated, filed an Article 78 proceeding to vacate the denial of his FOIL request by the District Attorney’s Office of the County of New York (DANY). Jones sought a trial verdict sheet from his 2000 conviction for conspiracy and assault. DANY denied the request, stating Judiciary Law § 255, which Jones cited, applies only to court clerks, not district attorneys. The court affirmed DANY's denial, ruling that district attorneys are not clerks of the court, and also found Jones's claims to be time-barred under the four-month statute of limitations for Article 78 proceedings. The petition was consequently denied and dismissed with prejudice.

FOIL RequestVerdict SheetArticle 78 ProceedingStatute of LimitationsDistrict AttorneyCourt ClerkJudiciary LawPenal LawCriminal ConspiracyAssault
References
3
Case No. 13-07-005-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2007

Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District v. Sandra Acosta

This appeal concerns a retaliatory discharge case filed by Sandra Acosta (appellee) against Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District (appellant). Acosta alleged she was terminated in violation of section 451.001 of the Texas Labor Code for filing a workers' compensation claim. The school district filed a plea to the jurisdiction, arguing sovereign immunity had not been waived. The trial court denied the plea and awarded $4,500 in sanctions to Acosta. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that governmental immunity was indeed waived under Labor Code § 451.001 and Government Code § 311.034, thus subjecting school districts to such discrimination claims, and also found no abuse of discretion in the imposition of sanctions.

Sovereign ImmunityGovernmental Immunity WaiverRetaliatory DischargeWorkers' Compensation ClaimPlea to the JurisdictionTrial Court SanctionsAbuse of DiscretionTexas Labor CodeTexas Government CodeInterlocutory Appeal
References
7
Case No. 03-21-00120-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2022

Brian Manley, Chief of Austin Police Department Brian Manley, Individually Commander Mark Spangler, Austin Police Department Lt. Jerry Bauzon, Austin Police Department Officer Benjamin Bloodworth, Austin Police Department Officer Collin Fallon, Austin Police Department Sgt. Eric Kilcollins, Training Coordinator, Austin Police Academy And Officer Shand, Lead Instructor, Stress Reaction Training, Austin Police Academy v. Christopher Wise

Christopher Wise, a former Austin Police Academy cadet, sued Brian Manley (APD Chief) and six other APD officers after sustaining severe injuries, including heat exhaustion and stroke, during a stress reaction training in October 2018. Wise alleged that officers intentionally discouraged cadets from hydrating despite high temperatures and failed to provide timely medical aid. The defendants sought dismissal under the Texas Tort Claims Act's election-of-remedies provisions. The district court dismissed claims against the City of Austin and APD but not against the individual officers. The appellate court reversed the district court's decision, ruling that Wise's claims against the individual officers were based on conduct within the scope of their employment and could have been brought under the TTCA, thus mandating their dismissal.

Texas Tort Claims ActGovernmental ImmunityElection of RemediesScope of EmploymentPolice MisconductCadet InjuryHeat IllnessSupervisor NegligenceAppellate CourtReversal
References
25
Case No. 03-18-00740-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 06, 2020

Gerard Matzen// Marsha McLane, in Her Official Capacity as Director of Texas Civil Commitment Office, and the Texas Civil Commitment Office v. Marsha McLane, in Her Official Capacity as Director of Texas Civil Commitment Office, and the Texas Civil Commitment Office// Cross-Appellee, Gerard Matzen

Gerard Matzen appealed a district court's partial grant of Appellees' plea to the jurisdiction in his civil commitment case under the sexually violent predator (SVP) statute, challenging rulings on his APA, ultra vires, and immunity claims. The Texas Civil Commitment Office (TCCO) and its Director Marsha McLane cross-appealed the denial of their plea regarding Matzen's procedural due process and takings claims. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order, finding Matzen's APA and ultra vires claims invalid and qualified immunity inapplicable. However, the court upheld the district court's denial of the plea concerning Matzen's procedural due process and takings claims, concluding they presented viable constitutional questions requiring further factual development.

Civil commitmentSexually Violent Predator ActPlea to the jurisdictionSovereign immunityUltra vires claimsAdministrative Procedure ActDue processTakings clauseCost recovery feesGovernment agency authority
References
65
Case No. 08-01-00217-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2002

Ysleta Independent School District v. Monarrez, Gustavo and Jose Rodriguez

Appellees, Gustavo Monarrez and Jose Rodriguez, mechanics for Ysleta Independent School District, were terminated for punching each other's time cards. They alleged gender discrimination under Section 21.051 of the Texas Labor Code, claiming female employees involved in similar incidents received less severe discipline. A jury found in their favor, awarding lost wages, benefits, and mental anguish damages. The District's post-trial motions were denied. This appeal challenged the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence for the prima facie case, pretext for discrimination, mental anguish damages, and attorney's fees. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings.

Employment DiscriminationGender DiscriminationTexas Labor CodeWrongful TerminationMental Anguish DamagesAttorney's FeesSufficiency of EvidencePrima Facie CasePretextJury Verdict
References
32
Case No. 07-07-0288-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 28, 2009

State Office of Risk Management v. Rachel Leigh Herrera, Victoria Danielle Herrera, Matthew Ryen Herrera, Kelcey Mercedes Dena Herrera, Care'n Destiny Herrera, Beneficiaries of Jose Arturo Herrera, And Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool

The State Office of Risk Management (SORM) appealed the trial court's dismissal of its lawsuit seeking judicial review of an appeals panel decision, which found SORM responsible for paying death benefits to the beneficiaries of deceased police officer Jose Herrera. Officer Herrera died in the line of duty, and SORM denied liability, arguing he was employed by the City of Friona, a self-insured entity, not the State. The trial court dismissed SORM's suit because SORM failed to timely name the City of Friona as a defendant within the statutory 40-day period. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, ruling that the City of Friona was an indispensable party and the 40-day limitations period was not tolled for misidentification of parties. The court also upheld the award of attorney's fees to certain Herrera defendants, deeming SORM's claims against them to be without foundation.

Workers' CompensationJudicial ReviewInsurance Carrier LiabilitySubject Matter JurisdictionIndispensable PartyAttorney's FeesStatutory BeneficiariesMisidentification of PartiesAppellate Court DecisionTexas Labor Law
References
20
Case No. 07-21-00058-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2022

Samuel San Miguel v. Marsha McLane

Samuel San Miguel, a sexually violent predator civilly committed for treatment, filed a lawsuit in Lamb County's 154th District Court against Texas Civil Commitment Office (TCCO) employees. He alleged constitutional rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, specifically concerning denial of computer access, limited law library time, and his placement in a Secure Management Unit. The TCCO employees moved to dismiss, arguing that the Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 841 mandated the lawsuit be heard in the original committing court, the 435th District Court of Montgomery County. The Lamb County court agreed and dismissed the suit without prejudice. On appeal to the Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo, San Miguel contended federal law preempted the state's jurisdictional requirements. The Court of Appeals, however, found no conflict between Chapter 841 and federal law, concluding that the state statute merely dictates the proper venue without hindering federal claims. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal.

Civil CommitmentSexually Violent PredatorConstitutional RightsSection 1983Federal PreemptionState Court JurisdictionAppellate ProcedureInadequate BriefingDue ProcessEqual Protection
References
9
Case No. 08-05-00056-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 28, 2005

Ysleta Independent School District v. Jose Griego

The Ysleta Independent School District (YISD) appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Jose Griego. Griego, a former counselor, sued YISD after his contract was not renewed, alleging retaliatory termination for cooperating in a child abuse investigation. YISD argued that Griego failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by the Education Code for employment contract disputes. The court found that Griego was a contractual employee and was required to follow the administrative appeal process under Chapter 21 of the Education Code before filing a lawsuit. Consequently, the trial court lacked jurisdiction. The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision and dismissed Griego's suit.

School LawExhaustion of Administrative RemediesEmployment ContractNon-renewalTeacher TerminationChild Abuse ReportingRetaliatory DischargeJurisdictional DisputeTexas Education CodeTexas Family Code
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 8,734 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