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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Workforce Commission v. Olivas

Ms. Maria Elena Olivas, a former employee of the Texas Workforce Commission, filed a workers' compensation claim after developing injuries in March 2008. She was subsequently dismissed from employment in May 2009, leading her to file a suit against the Commission for retaliatory discharge. The Commission filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting sovereign immunity and arguing that Section 311.034 of the Texas Government Code mandated an unequivocal waiver of immunity, which it claimed was absent in the anti-retaliation provisions of Chapter 451. The trial court denied the Commission's plea. On appeal, the Commission contended that Section 311.034 abrogated existing Texas Supreme Court precedent (*Kerrville State Hosp. v. Fernandez*) that recognized a waiver of sovereign immunity for such claims against state agencies. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that the State Applications Act (SAA) still provides a clear and unambiguous waiver of sovereign immunity for retaliation claims against state agencies, and that neither Section 311.034 nor the *Travis Central Appraisal District v. Norman* decision altered this established legal analysis.

Sovereign ImmunityRetaliatory DischargeWorkers' Compensation ClaimPlea to JurisdictionAppellate ReviewGovernment CodeLabor CodeLegislative WaiverState AgenciesStatutory Construction
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 1984

Lynch v. Port of Houston Authority

This case is an appeal from a summary judgment involving the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The appellants, Donna Jean Lynch and Annette Bogany, sued the Port of Houston Authority and its employees for the wrongful deaths of William Presley Lynch and Dean C. Bogany, Jr., who died from chemical fumes while working in a grain bin. The trial court granted summary judgment, asserting sovereign immunity. The appellants argued that sovereign immunity should be abolished, violates both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions, and that the Texas Tort Claims Act's limitations on exemplary damages were inapplicable or unconstitutional. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, upholding the doctrine of sovereign immunity and rejecting all of the appellants' constitutional challenges and statutory interpretations.

Sovereign ImmunityGovernmental ImmunitySummary JudgmentTexas Tort Claims ActExemplary DamagesWrongful DeathConstitutional LawFourteenth AmendmentDue ProcessEqual Protection
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

City of Mexia v. Tooke

The City of Mexia contracted with J.E. Tooke and Sons for curbside collection, but later terminated the agreement citing budgetary constraints. Tooke sued the City for breach of contract, and the trial court denied the City's plea to jurisdiction and ruled in favor of Tooke. On appeal, the central question was whether section 51.075 of the Texas Local Government Code waives sovereign immunity for home-rule municipalities. The appellate court examined the statutory language and Supreme Court precedents on immunity waiver, concluding that the 'plead and be impleaded' language does not constitute a clear and unambiguous waiver. Furthermore, the court rejected arguments that the City waived immunity through partial performance or by acting in a proprietary capacity, as solid waste removal is a governmental function. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.

Sovereign ImmunityHome-Rule MunicipalitiesWaiver of ImmunityBreach of ContractTexas Local Government CodeGovernmental FunctionsProprietary FunctionsPlea to JurisdictionAppellate ReviewStatutory Interpretation
References
33
Case No. 13-0605
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 24, 2015

Humana Insurance Company v. Dolores Mueller

The Supreme Court of Texas addressed whether a private engineering firm, Brown & Gay, contracted by a governmental unit, is entitled to sovereign immunity when sued for negligence. The firm was responsible for designing road signs and traffic layouts for the Westpark Tollway, where a fatal accident occurred. The Court concluded that extending sovereign immunity to the private contractor does not align with the doctrine's underlying purposes, primarily protecting the public treasury from unforeseen expenditures. It highlighted that contractor costs are factored into bids and covered by insurance, unlike unexpected government litigation. The Court further reasoned that sovereign immunity should not cover private entities exercising independent discretion, as Brown & Gay's design decisions were its own, not direct government mandates. Consequently, the Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court's decision, denying sovereign immunity to Brown & Gay.

Sovereign ImmunityGovernmental ImmunityPrivate Contractor LiabilityNegligenceTexas Supreme CourtPublic Works ContractsIndependent DiscretionTort ClaimsJudicial PrecedentImmunity Waiver
References
32
Case No. 03-05-00837-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 23, 2008

Diana Foster v. Texas Retirement System, Trustee for Texas Public Retired School Employees Group Insurance Program Aetna Life Insurance Company And Aetna Health Management, LLC

Diana Foster, a retired teacher, sued the Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) and its insurance administrators, Aetna, after her claim for intravenous immune globulin infusion therapy (IVIG) was denied. She asserted claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, violations of the insurance code, and deceptive trade practices, along with a request for declaratory judgment. The trial court granted appellees' pleas to the jurisdiction, dismissing the lawsuit without prejudice, citing sovereign immunity. Foster appealed, arguing her declaratory judgment claim was not barred, legislative immunity was waived, the administrative procedures act provided for judicial review, and Aetna was not protected by sovereign immunity. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal, finding that sovereign immunity applied to TRS and, by extension, to Aetna as its agent, and that Foster's claims did not fall under any exceptions for judicial review or waiver of immunity.

Sovereign ImmunityGovernment AgencyInsurance DisputeDeclaratory JudgmentAdministrative Procedures ActAgency AdjudicationJudicial ReviewBreach of ContractDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingDeceptive Trade Practices Act
References
26
Case No. 06 Civ. 4880(PKC)
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2009

Swarna v. Al-Awadi

Plaintiff Swarna Vishranthamma sued her former employers, Badar Al-Awadi and Halal Muhammad Al-Shaitan (Individual Defendants), and the State of Kuwait for slavery and slavery-like practices under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) and for labor law violations. The Individual Defendants claimed diplomatic immunity, and Kuwait claimed sovereign immunity. The court ruled that the Individual Defendants' alleged actions were private acts, not official diplomatic functions, thus denying them residual diplomatic immunity for both ATCA and labor law claims. Conversely, Kuwait was granted sovereign immunity from the labor law claims, as it was not the direct employer, and its financial support to the diplomat was deemed a sovereign act. Kuwait also retained immunity from the ATCA claims, as the diplomat's tortious acts were outside the scope of employment, and claims of ratification/aiding and abetting involved discretionary governmental functions. Consequently, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for a default judgment against the Individual Defendants but denied it against the State of Kuwait, dismissing all claims against Kuwait for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Diplomatic ImmunitySovereign ImmunityAlien Tort Claims ActForced LaborInvoluntary ServitudeHuman TraffickingSexual SlaveryDefault JudgmentEmployment LawVicarious Liability
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Richards v. Texas a & M University System

Justice Bill Vance concurs with the affirmation of the trial court's judgment of dismissal. Richards argued that the lack of a statute waiving sovereign immunity for Texas A & M University employees in workers' compensation retaliation suits, while such waivers exist for other state agencies, constitutes a denial of equal protection. Vance states that the court cannot legislate such a waiver and that any change to sovereign immunity must come from the legislature or the Supreme Court. Therefore, the trial court's dismissal due to intact sovereign immunity was correct.

Sovereign ImmunityWorkers' Compensation RetaliationEqual ProtectionLegislative AuthorityJudicial RestraintAppellate ReviewTexas LawState AgenciesDismissalJurisdiction
References
3
Case No. No. 10-96-049-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 1996

Matthew Carroll v. Kermit Black

Matthew Carroll sued several Texas A&M University officials claiming wrongful discharge. The defendants filed a plea to the jurisdiction asserting the defense of sovereign immunity, which the trial court granted. Carroll appealed, questioning if the Sabine Pilot exception to the employment-at-will doctrine applies to public employees asserting sovereign immunity. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, stating that without legislative consent or a statutory exception, sovereign immunity applies and is not overcome by the Sabine Pilot exception in this context.

wrongful dischargesovereign immunityemployment-at-will doctrineSabine Pilot exceptionpublic employeesplea to jurisdictionTexas A&M Universityappellate reviewgovernmental immunity
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Carroll v. Black

Matthew Carroll sued officials from Texas A & M University, alleging wrongful discharge. The defendants successfully filed a plea to the jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity, which the trial court granted. Carroll appealed, raising the question of whether the Sabine Pilot exception, which protects employees discharged for refusing to perform illegal acts, applies to public employees where sovereign immunity is asserted. The appellate court concluded that neither legislative consent nor a statutory exception to sovereign immunity existed in this case. Consequently, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the dismissal of Carroll's suit against the state officials.

wrongful dischargesovereign immunityemployment-at-willSabine Pilot exceptionpublic employeesgovernmental immunityappellate reviewemployment lawTexas lawstatutory interpretation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

San Antonio State Hospital v. Lopez

Louis C. Lopez was injured during his employment with the San Antonio State Hospital and filed a workers' compensation claim. He was subsequently terminated and sued the Hospital for discrimination and retaliatory discharge for pursuing his claim. The Hospital filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting that its sovereign immunity was retained through the official immunity of its employees, despite the recognized waiver of sovereign immunity for workers' compensation anti-retaliation claims. The trial court denied the Hospital's plea. On interlocutory appeal, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's order, distinguishing previous case law on respondeat superior liability and official immunity. The court adopted the reasoning that official immunity is not applicable in anti-retaliation cases because individual supervisory employees are not directly liable under the Anti-Retaliation Law, thus precluding the governmental entity from vicariously asserting official immunity.

Workers' CompensationAnti-Retaliation LawOfficial ImmunitySovereign ImmunityPlea to JurisdictionRespondeat SuperiorGovernmental ImmunityTexas Labor CodeEmployment DiscriminationWrongful Termination
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 1,129 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