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. 01-18-00002-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2019

Shakeel Uddin v. Jacqueline K. Cunningham Deputy Receiver of Southern Title Insurance Corporation and Southern Title Insurance Corporation

Appellant Shakeel Uddin appealed a summary judgment granted to Southern Title Insurance Corporation (STIC). Uddin had guaranteed a loan to Nabeel & Amaan Investments, Inc. (NAI), which defaulted, leading to a claim by the lender, Sterling Bank, under a title insurance policy issued by STIC. After paying Sterling and being assigned the loan rights, STIC sued Uddin directly on the guaranty. Uddin argued that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and that he had raised material issues of fact on his affirmative defenses. The First District Court of Texas affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the statute of limitations was not jurisdictional, STIC's capacity issue was cured by the relation-back doctrine, STIC established its claim, and Uddin had contractually waived his other affirmative defenses.

Guaranty AgreementLoan DefaultTitle InsuranceSubrogationStatute of LimitationsStandingCapacityRelation-Back DoctrineContractual WaiverAffirmative Defenses
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Garcia v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

Daniel Pantoja Garcia appealed a directed verdict in a wrongful death case against Norfolk Southern Railway Company. His wife, Lydia Garcia, an employee of Progress Rail, died in an explosion while torch-cutting a fuel tank on Norfolk Southern's property. Garcia alleged Norfolk Southern was negligent, citing failure to warn, failure to discharge an assumed duty to clean the tank, and failure to comply with OSHA regulations. The trial court granted a directed verdict, finding no duty owed by Norfolk Southern. The appellate court affirmed, concluding there was no evidence Norfolk Southern assumed a duty to clean the tank, lacked superior knowledge of the hazard, or violated OSHA regulations given the contractors' awareness of the fuel.

Wrongful DeathNegligenceDirected VerdictAssumption of DutyDuty to WarnOSHA RegulationsNegligence Per SeFlammable MaterialsRailroad IndustryExplosion Accident
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Southern Underwriters v. Schoolcraft

J. A. Schoolcraft, an employee of Southern Fuel & Transfer Company, sustained accidental injuries in December 1937 while working as a structural steel worker in El Paso County, Texas. The insurance carrier, Southern Underwriters, initiated a suit as plaintiff against Schoolcraft to set aside an award made to him by the Industrial Accident Board. Schoolcraft filed a cross-action for total and permanent disability due to a broken pelvis, forearm, wrist, and dislocated kidney, among other injuries. The case was tried with a jury, leading to a judgment largely based on their verdict, which the court later modified regarding weekly compensation. Southern Underwriters appealed, raising objections concerning the definition of 'partial incapacity' and specific jury arguments, as well as questions about insurance policy coverage. The appellate court found no reversible error and affirmed the lower court's decision, upholding Schoolcraft's compensation award.

Workmen's Compensation LawIndustrial Accident BoardTotal Permanent DisabilityPartial Incapacity DefinitionLoss of Earning CapacityInsurance Coverage DisputeAccidental InjuriesStructural Steel WorkerWrit of Error ReviewJury Verdict
References
26
Case No. ANA 0308440
Regular
Jul 26, 2007

PATRICIA C. EVANS vs. SOUTHERN WINE \u0026 SPIRITS

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by applicant Patricia C. Evans against Southern Wine & Spirits. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition as untimely. The WCAB determined the petition was filed over 25 days after the judge's decision, exceeding the jurisdictional 20-day limit plus potential mailing extensions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingLabor Code Section 5903Jurisdictional Time LimitService of DecisionCode of Civil Procedure Section 1013WCAB Rule 10507Date of ReceiptMaranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Melvin West v. Southern County Mutual Insurance Company

Melvin West, an employee of Super Surface, Inc., was injured while driving a concrete truck. Super Surface, which did not subscribe to workers' compensation insurance, filed a claim under its business auto policy with Southern County Mutual Insurance Company. After Super Surface assigned its claim to West, he sued Southern County. Southern County moved for summary judgment, arguing the policy excluded employee bodily injury claims. West contended an exception for 'domestic employees not entitled to workers' compensation benefits' brought his claim under coverage, arguing 'domestic employee' was ambiguous. The court, agreeing with a prior Fort Worth Court of Appeals ruling and considering the Labor and Transportation Codes, found the phrase unambiguously referred to household employees not covered by workers' compensation, thus affirming the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Southern County.

Workers' CompensationBusiness Auto PolicyInsurance ExclusionSummary JudgmentPolicy InterpretationDomestic EmployeeAmbiguityTexas LawAppellate ReviewStatutory Interpretation
References
11
Case No. ADJ2721650 (AHM 0082733) ADJ1775630 (AHM 0085375) ADJ3043671 (AHM 0094450)
Regular
Feb 13, 2009

RAINEY RANDALL vs. SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS, TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, ACE USA/ESIS, EXPLORER INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a dispute over the date of injury for a workers' compensation claim of cumulative upper extremity and neck trauma. The applicant alleges injury during her employment with Southern Wine & Spirits. One defendant insurer, ESIS, contends the original finding of a single date of injury was incorrect and argues for two separate cumulative trauma injuries. The Appeals Board rescinded the original order, finding the record requires further development to definitively determine the date(s) of injury under Labor Code section 5412. The matter is returned to the trial level for further evidence, including potentially further medical evaluation, to establish the correct injury date(s) before allocation of liability is addressed.

WCABReconsiderationDate of InjuryCumulative TraumaUpper ExtremitiesACE USA/ESISTIG Insurance CompanySouthern Wine & SpiritsLabor Code Section 5412Temporary Disability
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Terry v. Southern Floral Co.

Deborah M. Terry appealed a summary judgment in favor of Southern Floral Company in a worker's compensation retaliation case. Terry, a salesperson, suffered multiple work injuries and filed compensation claims, returning to work after earlier incidents. After a back injury in October 1993, she was restricted from work by her doctor in February 1994 and was eventually terminated in August 1994 due to extended absence. Southern offered her first preference for any available opening once she was released. The court found that Southern Floral Company provided a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for termination, consistent with precedent. Terry failed to provide sufficient controverting evidence of a retaliatory motive, thus affirming the trial court's summary judgment.

Worker's CompensationRetaliatory DischargeSummary JudgmentEmployment LawAbsence Control PolicyCausal LinkLegitimate Nondiscriminatory ReasonBurden of ProofTexas Labor CodeEmployer Retaliation
References
17
Case No. 02A01-9801-CH-00006
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 10, 1998

J.C. Bradford v. Southern Realty

This case involves J.C. Bradford & Co. appealing the dismissal of its complaint and the judgment awarded to Southern Realty Partners and Weston Management Company on their counterclaims. Bradford sued Southern and Weston for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation and violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act regarding an "expense stop" in a lease agreement for an office building. Bradford alleged that Weston, acting as an agent for Southern, misrepresented the estimated operating expenses for the building, leading to a significantly higher actual cost. The trial court dismissed Bradford's complaint and awarded judgment to Southern on its counterclaim for additional rent, interest, late fees, and attorneys' fees, after concluding the proceedings based on opening statements. The appellate court vacated and remanded the case, holding that trial judges are not authorized to involuntarily dismiss an action solely based on opening statements of counsel, especially given the complexity of the allegations and the need for witness credibility assessment.

Fraudulent MisrepresentationNegligent MisrepresentationTennessee Consumer Protection ActLease AgreementExpense StopOperating ExpensesSummary JudgmentInvoluntary DismissalOpening StatementsStipulations of Fact
References
2
Case No. W2007-00436-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 15, 2009

Thomas David Jordan v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Company, A Corporation, and Norfolk Southern Railway Company, A Corporation

Thomas David Jordan, a Norfolk Southern Railway employee, sustained severe injuries when he was struck by a Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway train while performing duties between tracks. Jordan initiated a Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) lawsuit against Norfolk Southern and a common law negligence claim against Burlington Northern. A jury awarded Jordan $4 million, finding Norfolk Southern 100% at fault. On appeal, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the jury's verdict, rejecting arguments about state statute preemption, jury instructions on causation, and the excessiveness of damages. However, the court reversed the trial court's decision regarding an inter-railroad Letter Agreement, ruling that Norfolk Southern must indemnify Burlington Northern for its defense costs related to the claim.

FELA claimRailroad employee injuryInter-railroad liabilityNegligence causationFederal preemptionJury damage awardIndemnity contract disputeTrack clearance safetyWorkplace accidentAppellate procedure
References
94
Case No. 2017-08-0232, 2017-08-0233, 4008-2017, 14688-2017
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 2018

Carpenter v. Southern Transit

This interlocutory appeal concerns an employee's claim for a low back injury and the determination of employer responsibility. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's finding that employee David Carpenter was likely to prevail on medical causation. The Board also upheld the trial court's conclusion that an implied contract of employment existed between Mr. Carpenter and Carter O’Neal Logistics, despite his initial hiring by Southern Transit, making Carter O’Neal responsible for the claim. The decision emphasizes the agreement for remuneration and the right to control the details of work as key to establishing an implied contract. A partial dissent argued Southern Transit should remain solely liable for the benefits awarded.

Employer ResponsibilityMedical CausationImplied Contract of EmploymentLoaned Servant DoctrineTruck Driver InjuryLow Back InjuryInterlocutory AppealWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardJoint EmploymentWorkers' Compensation Law
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 442 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