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. ADJ11952165
Regular
Nov 25, 2019

BILL HUMPHREY vs. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, PSI Through CJPIA, administered by YORK RISK GROUP

This case involved applicant Bill Humphrey's claim for psychiatric injury against the City of San Luis Obispo. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that Humphrey sustained an industrial psychiatric injury. The Board affirmed the judge's determination that while a job reclassification was a good faith personnel action, it was not the substantial cause of the injury. Instead, increased job duties and applicant's internal pressure were deemed the predominant causes of his psychiatric condition.

Labor Code Section 3208.3good faith personnel actionpsychiatric injurypredominant causesubstantial causemultilevel analysisRolda v. Pitney BowesInc.panel qualified medical evaluatorPQME
References
2
Case No. 14-09-00645-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 10, 2010

Sharp Engineering and Pradeep Shah v. Sergio R. Luis and Judith Yanet Delgado, Individually and as Next Friend of Sergio Luis Delgado, Jackeline Luis and Johnatha Luis, Minors

Sharp Engineering and Pradeep Shah appealed the denial of their motion to dismiss a negligence suit. The appellees, Sergio R. Luis and Judith Yanet Delgado, filed a negligence suit against Sharp Engineering and Shah but did not file the statutorily required certificate of merit with their original petition, as mandated by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 150. The appellees later filed the certificate with their first amended petition. The appellate court reviewed the statutory construction of Section 150.002 de novo and held that the certificate of merit must be filed with the first-filed complaint. The court concluded that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the motion to dismiss because the appellees failed to timely file the certificate. The case was reversed and remanded for a determination of whether the dismissal should be with or without prejudice.

negligence claimcertificate of meritstatutory interpretationmotion to dismissprofessional services liabilityTexas Civil Practice and Remedies Codeabuse of discretionappellate revieworiginal petitionamended complaint
References
15
Case No. 14-03-01338-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2005

Angelica Haro, Indivudally and as Next Friend of Her Minor Son Luis Gonzalez, Jr., and Luis Gonzalez, Sr. v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Company

This case involves an appeal from a summary judgment in favor of Universal Underwriters Insurance Company regarding an insurance indemnity dispute. Angelica Haro, individually and as next friend of her minor son, Luis Gonzalez, Jr., and Luis Gonzalez, Sr. appealed the decision. The core issue was whether an automobile dealer's garage insurance policy covered the liability of a driver (Daniel Rodriguez) and a passenger (Luis Gonzalez, Jr.) arising from a test drive of a dealership vehicle from Landmark Chevrolet. The court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that Rodriguez was validly excluded from the garage operations coverage and that Gonzalez, as a passenger, was not a person 'required by law to be an insured' under the auto hazard coverage of the policies.

insurance indemnitygarage insurance policyauto hazard coveragesummary judgment appealautomobile liabilitypermissive userTexas Insurance Codeappellate courtinsurance coverage disputetest drive incident
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

San Antonio Building & Construction Trades Council v. City of San Antonio

The San Antonio Building and Construction Trades Council (SABTC) and individual representatives challenged the City of San Antonio regarding prevailing wage requirements for construction workers on a convention center hotel project. SABTC argued that Chapter 2258 of the Texas Government Code mandated prevailing wages, but the trial court denied this, finding that despite being a 'public work', no 'public funds' were used for its construction. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment. It determined that public funds pledged as security for revenue bonds, or the bonds themselves, did not constitute public funds used for the 'construction' of the project under the relevant statute.

Prevailing Wage LawPublic WorksPublic FundsAssociational StandingLabor LawDeclaratory JudgmentTexas Government CodeRevenue BondsHotel Occupancy TaxStatutory Interpretation
References
16
Case No. 15-25-00093-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 19, 2025

State of Texas v. City of San Antonio, Ron Niremberg, in His Official Capacity as Mayor of the City of San Antonio, and Erik Walsh, in His Official Capacity as City Manager of the City of San Antonio

The State sued the City of San Antonio, its Mayor, and its City Manager for ultra vires conduct under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, seeking declarations that the City’s plan to spend taxpayer dollars on travel for out-of-state abortions violates the Texas Constitution’s Gift Clause. The district court granted the City’s plea to the jurisdiction, asserting the claim was not ripe, and dismissed the suit. The State argues that the City’s plan to fund out-of-state abortion travel violates the Gift Clause by lacking public benefit, failing to serve a public purpose, and not retaining public control over funds. The State contends that delaying judicial review would cause great hardship due to the imminent risk of constitutional injury from the disbursement of funds, which the City intended to expedite before SB 33's effective date or by the end of its fiscal year. The State asserts the case is ripe for review because the illegal activity is "likely to occur," and despite SB 33 prohibiting such funding, the City's belief it can disburse funds by September 30, 2025, keeps the controversy live.

Public Funds MisuseAbortion Travel FundingTexas Gift ClauseRipeness DoctrineUltra Vires ActConstitutional ChallengeState-City ConflictReproductive Rights PolicyTaxpayer MoneyInjunctive Relief
References
89
Case No. 04-11-00402-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 29, 2012

City of San Antonio, and Its Agent, San Antonio Water System v. Albert Kevin Martin, A/K/A Kevin Martin

Albert Kevin Martin filed a whistleblower action against his former employer, San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and the City of San Antonio, alleging constructive discharge after reporting asbestos pipe disposal concerns to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). A jury initially found in Martin's favor, but SAWS appealed, disputing the causal link between Martin's report and his constructive discharge, and challenging the compensatory damages award. The appellate court affirmed the jury's finding of causation, concluding that SAWS's adverse actions were linked to Martin's whistleblowing, despite SAWS's alternative explanations. However, the court determined there was legally insufficient evidence to support the jury's award for past and future compensatory damages, particularly regarding mental anguish and chest pains, as the evidence presented did not meet the required legal standards for establishing such damages. Consequently, the appellate judgment was "AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED," deleting all references to compensatory damages from the trial court's judgment.

WhistleblowerConstructive DischargeRetaliationAsbestosEnvironmental ComplaintTCEQCausationCompensatory DamagesMental AnguishLegal Sufficiency
References
19
Case No. 04-14-00451-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2014

Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc. v. City of Public Service Board of San Antonio, a Municipal Board of the City of San Antonio

Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc. appealed an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction on its attorney's fees claim in a breach of contract suit against the City of San Antonio acting through the City Public Service Board (CPS). The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, affirmed the trial court's decision. The court determined that Chapter 271 of the Texas Local Government Code, as applicable to the 2004 contract, did not waive governmental immunity for attorney's fees. Furthermore, the court rejected arguments that CPS waived immunity by seeking affirmative relief or engaging in a proprietary function. The appellate court concluded that the trial court properly granted the plea to the jurisdiction due to the absence of a clear and unambiguous waiver of immunity for attorney's fees.

Governmental ImmunityAttorney's FeesBreach of ContractPlea to JurisdictionTexas Local Government CodeChapter 271Waiver of ImmunityProprietary FunctionSubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate Review
References
20
Case No. ADJ7106903
Regular
Sep 15, 2015

DAVID CONNOR vs. RESTAURANTS TO YOU/CAFÉ RUNNER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This order transfers venue for Case No. ADJ7106903, involving David Connor and Restaurants To You/Café Runner, from the San Luis Obispo District Office to the Santa Barbara Satellite Office. The transfer is necessitated by both parties exercising their challenges under Appeals Board Rule 10453, leaving no available judges in San Luis Obispo. The Presiding Judge in Santa Barbara will schedule the matter for trial upon receipt.

Venue transferAppeals Board rule 10453Challenge of judgePresiding Workers' Compensation JudgeSanta Barbara Satellite OfficeSan Luis Obispo District OfficeSetting for trialWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardRestaurants to YouCafe Runner
References
1
Case No. ADJ9320206
Regular
May 08, 2014

MIKE VILLALOBOS vs. WESTERN VILLAGE HEALTH CLUB, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves applicant Mike Villalobos seeking removal of a decision denying his request to change venue from San Luis Obispo to Santa Barbara. The WCAB denied removal, holding that Santa Barbara only has a satellite office of the Oxnard District Office, not a formal WCAB district office. The Board deferred to the DWC's administrative construction that only district offices count for venue purposes, citing practical differences in staffing and facilities. Therefore, the original venue in San Luis Obispo was upheld.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalChange of VenueDistrict OfficeSatellite OfficeAdministrative ConstructionLabor Code Section 5501.5Goleta District OfficeOxnard District OfficeSanta Barbara Satellite Office
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sharp Engineering v. Luis

This case involves an appeal by Sharp Engineering and Pra-deep Shah from the denial of their motion to dismiss a negligence suit. Appellees Sergio R. Luis and Judith Yanet Delgado, et al., sued the appellants alleging negligence in the design of a roof, but failed to file a statutorily required certificate of merit with their original petition. The appellate court, reviewing the statutory construction of Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 150.002, held that a certificate of merit must be filed with the first-filed complaint. Since appellees only filed their certificate with an amended petition, they failed to comply. The trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss was deemed an abuse of discretion, leading to the reversal of the order and a remand for a determination of dismissal with or without prejudice.

Professional NegligenceCertificate of MeritStatutory ConstructionMotion to DismissTexas Civil Practice and Remedies CodeAbuse of DiscretionEngineering MalpracticeAppellate ReviewRemandPleadings
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 1,190 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