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. 03-02-00089-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2003

Envoy Medical Systems, L.L.C. and Independent Review Incorporated v. State of Texas Greg Abbott, Attorney General of Texas And Jose Montemayor, Insurance Commissioner of Texas

Appellants Envoy Medical Systems, L.L.C. and Independent Review Incorporated appealed a trial court's judgment concerning the disclosure of certain records under the Public Information Act. The case originated from a request for information made to the Texas Department of Insurance related to appellants' applications for certification as Independent Review Organizations (IROs). The Attorney General had previously ruled that the requested information, including reviewer lists, contracts, and compensation, could not be withheld. Appellants argued that the information was 'confidential by law' and also excepted from disclosure under the commercial or financial information clause of the PIA. The appellate court reviewed for abuse of discretion and affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that appellants failed to meet their burden to prove an exception to disclosure applied.

Public Information ActDisclosure of RecordsIndependent Review OrganizationsConfidentialityCommercial InformationFinancial InformationAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewInjunctive ReliefAdministrative Law
References
12
Case No. 03-01-00400-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2002

Richard Wallace Pearce and Jesse Ray Blann v. City of Round Rock Round Rock Development Review Board Frank Del Castillo, in His Capacity as Member of the Round Rock Development Review Board Terry Hagood, in His Capacity as Member of the Round Rock Development Review Board

Appellants Richard Wallace Pearce and Jesse Ray Blann appealed the district court's judgment affirming the Round Rock Development Review Board's denial of their permit applications for seven outdoor advertising structures. The core issue was whether the structures qualified as 'signs' and were entitled to non-conforming use status under the City's ordinance, which became effective February 27, 1997. The Court of Appeals held that four of the structures were 'signs' due to having a surface capable of displaying text, despite not yet having advertising affixed, and were therefore entitled to non-conforming use. The court reversed and remanded the Board's decisions regarding these four structures. However, it affirmed the district court's judgment for the remaining three structures, which lacked such a surface, and also upheld the constitutionality of the City's sign ordinance against a takings claim.

ZoningOutdoor AdvertisingNon-conforming UsePermit DenialExtraterritorial JurisdictionAbuse of DiscretionStatutory InterpretationMunicipal OrdinanceTexas Court of AppealsProperty Rights
References
30
Case No. 04-02-00881-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 2003

Ian Hefley, (APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE) v. Sentry Insurance Co., (APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT)

Ian Hefley appealed a decision by the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Appeals Panel after Sentry Insurance Co. denied his claim for a lower back injury. The trial court struck Hefley's pleadings regarding Sentry's alleged failure to timely dispute the injury, ruling the issue was outside the permissible scope of judicial review under Texas Labor Code § 410.302. Hefley contended that the TWCC was refusing to apply precedent from *Downs v. Continental Casualty Co.*, but the appellate court found that TWCC merely acknowledged the *Downs* decision had not yet become final. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's order, concluding there was no abuse of discretion in striking Hefley's waiver allegations.

Workers' CompensationAppealTexas Labor CodeTimely DisputePleadingSpecial ExceptionsAbuse of DiscretionJudicial ReviewCompensabilityAppellate Court
References
6
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 01011
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 16, 2022

Hamm v. Review Assoc., LLC

The plaintiff, Peter Hamm, an employee, sustained injuries after falling from a ladder while servicing a security system at premises owned by Review Associates, LLC and leased by Fresh Direct, LLC. He initiated a personal injury action alleging common-law negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240(1), and 241(6). The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to the defendants, dismissing the complaint. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified this order, denying summary judgment for the Labor Law § 240(1) claim against both defendants due to triable issues of fact regarding whether the work constituted "repairs" or "routine maintenance." Additionally, the court denied summary judgment for the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims against Fresh Direct, LLC, as it failed to establish a lack of notice regarding the defective ladder. The court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claim against both defendants and the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims against Review Associates, LLC.

Personal InjuryLadder AccidentLabor Law § 240(1)Labor Law § 200Common-law NegligenceSummary JudgmentAppellate DivisionDuty to Maintain Safe PremisesRoutine Maintenance vs. RepairDangerous Condition
References
44
Case No. 01-08-00473-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 23, 2009

Expo Motorcars, LLC. v. Harris County Appraisal District, Harris County Appraisal Review Board

Expo Motorcars, L.L.C. challenged the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Harris County Appraisal District (HCAD) and Harris County Appraisal Review Board. Expo contested the constitutionality and application of Texas Tax Code sections 23.121(b) and 41.44(a)(1) regarding the valuation of its motor vehicle inventory for tax years 2004 and 2005. Expo argued it was denied meaningful due process review, presented uncontradicted evidence of actual value, and claimed the statutory formula violated the Texas Constitution. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that Expo's protest was untimely for 2004, the valuation method correctly used previous year's sales, and the tax code sections were constitutional as applied to Expo.

property taxmotor vehicle inventoryappraisaldue processTexas Tax Codeconstitutional challengesummary judgmenttax valuationstatutory interpretationappeal
References
4
Case No. 14-08-00493-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 21, 2009

BACM 2002 PB2 Westpark Dr LP, Houston Parkwest Place Ltd, as the Property Owners and the Property Owners v. Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District

This appeal concerns a lawsuit where a former property owner initiated judicial review of an ad valorem tax valuation protest by the county appraisal district. A subsequent property purchaser was later included as a plaintiff. The appraisal district challenged the plaintiffs' standing through a plea to the jurisdiction, leading the trial court to dismiss the suit. The appellate court affirmed this dismissal, concluding that neither the initial property owner (BACM 2002 PB2 Westpark Dr. LP) nor the subsequent owner (Houston Parkwest Place Ltd.) possessed the requisite standing to pursue judicial review. Consequently, the trial court was found to lack subject-matter jurisdiction over the dispute.

Property TaxAd Valorem TaxJudicial ReviewStanding DoctrineSubject-Matter JurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Tax CodeTexas Rule of Civil Procedure 28Appellate ProcedureProperty Ownership
References
30
Case No. 01-07-00321-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 28, 2008

Koll Bren Fund VI LP and Hartman 3100 Weslayan Acquisitions, LP v. Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District

The Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas affirmed the trial court's dismissal of a suit for judicial review brought by Koll Bren Fund VI, LP and Hartman 3100 Weslayan Acquisitions against the Harris County Appraisal District. Appellants challenged the dismissal of their ad valorem tax-valuation protest for the 2005 tax year. The trial court had granted HCAD's plea to the jurisdiction, asserting Koll Bren lacked standing as it had sold the property prior to January 1, 2005. The appellate court agreed, ruling that Koll Bren, not being the owner, had no standing, and Hartman, the true owner, also lacked standing for failing to exhaust administrative remedies by not filing its own protest with the Appraisal Review Board. Consequently, the appellate court concluded that the trial court correctly lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.

property taxad valorem taxjudicial reviewstandingjurisdictionappellate procedureTexas Tax CodeHarris CountyAppraisal Review Boardexhaustion of remedies
References
21
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00908 [213 AD3d 1117]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 16, 2023

Matter of Petre v. Allied Devices Corp.

Claimant Gheorghe Petre appealed a decision from the Workers' Compensation Board that denied his application for reconsideration and/or full Board review. The underlying Board decision had affirmed a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's ruling, which amended the claimant's work-related injury claim and directed his doctor to seek prior authorization for Gabapentin. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reviewed the Board's denial, limiting its scope to whether the Board had abused its discretion or acted arbitrarily. Finding no new evidence, material change in condition, or improper consideration of issues by the Board, the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision. Thus, the claimant's appeal for reconsideration and/or full Board review was ultimately denied.

Workers' CompensationAppellate ReviewBoard DiscretionReconsiderationInjury ClaimMedical ExpensesDrug FormularyGabapentinProcedural Due ProcessAdministrative Law
References
7
Case No. 03-06-00675-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2010

Texas Mutual Insurance Company v. Michael M. Stelzer, D.C. and Texas Workers' Compensation Commission

This administrative appeal addresses whether the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (TWCC) erred in deferring to the Texas Board of Chiropractic Examiners's (TBCE) determination that "needle EMG" is within the scope of chiropractic practice. Appellant, Texas Mutual Insurance Company, denied reimbursement for a needle EMG procedure performed by appellee, Michael M. Stelzer, D.C., arguing it was outside the authorized scope of chiropractic practice. The Independent Review Organization, the TWCC's Medical Review Division, and an Administrative Law Judge all upheld reimbursement, citing the TBCE's prior ruling. The district court affirmed these decisions. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that the TWCC's interpretation to defer to the TBCE's scope-of-practice determination was not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the Medical Fee Guideline.

Workers' CompensationMedical Fee DisputeScope of PracticeChiropracticNeedle EMGAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewTexas Court of AppealsInsurance ReimbursementLicensing Board
References
6
Case No. NUMBER 13-18-00236-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 05, 2020

Michael A. Garza v. Well Med Medical Management, Inc.

Appellant Michael A. Garza sued Well Med Medical Management, Inc. (Well Med) for personal injuries, alleging negligence under the doctrine of respondeat superior after a collision with Well Med employee Joanne Garcia. Garza claimed Garcia was reviewing work-related papers while driving, contending this fell within the course and scope of her employment due to Well Med's flexible work policies. The trial court granted Well Med's motion for summary judgment, finding Garcia was not acting within the scope of her employment. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding there was no evidence that reviewing documents while driving was a specifically assigned duty or that Well Med had impliedly approved such conduct, distinguishing it from situations where employees are on special missions for their employer.

Respondeat SuperiorSummary JudgmentCourse and Scope of EmploymentNegligenceVicarious LiabilityCommuting RuleSpecial Mission ExceptionEmployee ConductEmployer LiabilityTexas Law
References
18
Showing 1-10 of 21,787 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