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. 14-19-00539-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 22, 2020

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. v. Lowery Masonry, LLC

Appellant Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. (HWC) appealed a summary judgment that denied it recovery from Appellee Lowery Masonry, LLC, on a guaranty agreement. Lowery's president had signed a "Letter of Guarantee" to ensure prompt medical treatment for an injured employee, Sandro Tovar, and to pay HWC's usual and customary fees. Lowery later argued an exception applied because it had workers' compensation insurance with Texas Mutual Insurance Company, leading the trial court to grant summary judgment. The appellate court determined that Lowery's interpretation of the exception was unreasonable as it would render the phrase "additional payment" meaningless within the contract. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings, concluding that Lowery had not conclusively established its entitlement to summary judgment.

Contract LawGuaranty AgreementSummary JudgmentWorker's Compensation InsuranceMedical BillingAppellate ReviewContract InterpretationTexas LawHarris CountyFourteenth Court of Appeals
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. v. SGS Control Services, Inc.

Charles Reagan was injured at work and treated by Hand & Wrist Center. SGS North America, his employer, signed a "Letter of Guarantee" promising to pay for treatment if workers' compensation insurance didn't cover it. SGS failed to pay, leading Hand & Wrist to sue for breach of contract. SGS filed a plea to the jurisdiction, arguing Hand & Wrist failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the Workers' Compensation Act. The trial court granted the plea, and Hand & Wrist appealed, contending SGS did not invoke its workers' compensation coverage and that exclusive remedies provisions do not apply to healthcare providers. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that SGS invoked its workers' compensation coverage when it obtained it, and Hand & Wrist was required to exhaust administrative remedies with the Texas Department of Insurance-Workers’ Compensation Division before filing suit, as the Division has exclusive jurisdiction over medical fee disputes.

Workers' CompensationAdministrative RemediesSubject Matter JurisdictionPlea to the JurisdictionBreach of ContractHealthcare Provider ReimbursementExclusive RemediesTexas Labor CodeMedical Fee DisputeAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. 01-12-00216-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 04, 2014

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. and SCA Houston Hospital for Specialized Surgery L.P. v. Maintenance Supply Headquarters, LP

Appellants Hand & Wrist Center, P.A. and SCA Houston Hospital for Specialized Surgery, L.P. appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Maintenance Supply Headquarters, L.P., concerning a breach of contract claim. The dispute arose from a "Letter of Guarantee" signed by Maintenance Supply for medical services provided to an injured employee, Daniel Contreras, whose workers' compensation claim was denied. Maintenance Supply argued estoppel and the applicability of the Labor Code's exclusive remedies provision. The Court of Appeals found the estoppel defense inapplicable and, crucially, ruled that Labor Code section 408.001(a)'s exclusive remedies provision applies only to employees and their beneficiaries, not to health care providers. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Breach of contractSummary judgmentWorkers' compensationExclusive remedyHealth care providersStatutory interpretationTexas Labor CodeEstoppelLetter of GuaranteeAppellate review
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 05, 2003

Claim of Torres v. New York Palace

Claimant filed a workers' compensation claim in May 2001, alleging a wrist and back injury from an unwitnessed slip and fall while moving beer cases for his employer. The Workers' Compensation Board denied the claim, a decision which was subsequently affirmed on appeal. The court found substantial evidence to support the Board's determination that the claimant fabricated the injury in retaliation for being discharged by his employer on the same day as the alleged accident. Key inconsistencies included claimant's delay in seeking medical attention, hospital records only mentioning a wrist sprain without back injury or a fall, and a disputed timeline for reporting the incident to the employer. Consequently, the decision denying workers' compensation benefits was affirmed.

Workers' CompensationAccidental InjurySlip and FallFabricated ClaimRetaliationEmployee DischargeMedical RecordsWitness CredibilityNotice of InjuryAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. 02-19-00224-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 14, 2021

John Ellis v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit

John Ellis appealed a trial court's judgment affirming a Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) decision in his workers' compensation case against Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART). Ellis claimed a 2014 motor-vehicle accident aggravated preexisting injuries, including a right-shoulder rotator-cuff tear and right-wrist tendinitis. However, medical examiners, including a designated doctor, concluded that only cervical, shoulder, and wrist sprains/strains were compensable, while the disputed conditions were preexisting or inconsistent with the 2014 injury. The trial court upheld TDI's finding that the compensable injury did not extend to the rotator-cuff tear and tendinitis, and the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support its conclusion.

Workers' CompensationMedical CausationPreexisting InjuryAppellate ReviewLegal SufficiencyExpert Medical EvidenceTexas LawOn-the-Job InjuryRotator Cuff TearWrist Tendinitis
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2012

Hand & Wrist Center of Houston, P.A. and SCA Houston Hospital for Specialize Surgery, L.P. v. Republic Services, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal by Hand & Wrist Center of Houston and SCA Houston Hospital for Specialized Surgery (appellants) regarding the calculation of prejudgment interest. They sued Republic Services, Inc. (appellee) for breach of contract after Republic failed to fully pay for medical services provided to an employee, making partial payments just before trial. The trial court awarded prejudgment interest only on the damages found by the jury, excluding the pretrial partial payments. The appellate court found this to be an abuse of discretion, asserting that appellants were entitled to interest on all damages, including the belatedly paid amounts. Applying the 'declining principal' formula, the court modified the judgment to include interest on the partial payments, emphasizing the policy of compensating for lost use of money and deterring delayed payments.

Prejudgment InterestBreach of ContractPartial PaymentEquitable PrinciplesDeclining Principal FormulaAbuse of DiscretionContractual DamagesAppellate ReviewMedical ServicesTexas Law
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 23, 1994

Darensburg v. Tobey

The Darensburgs appealed a summary judgment that barred their medical malpractice claim against Dr. Nathan G. Tobey, their employer's (LTV Aerospace) medical director, who treated Lawrence Darensburg's work-related wrist injury. Dr. Tobey initially misdiagnosed the injury as a sprain before later identifying a fracture. The Darensburgs received workers' compensation for the injury and its aggravation but sought common-law damages for the alleged malpractice. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, ruling that the workers' compensation act's exclusive remedy provision applied. It concluded that the aggravation of the injury was work-related, and Dr. Tobey, as a salaried company doctor under LTV's substantial control, was immune from common-law liability under the co-employee immunity doctrine.

Workers' CompensationMedical MalpracticeExclusive RemedyCo-Employee ImmunitySummary JudgmentTexas LawWork-Related InjuryMisdiagnosisEmployer LiabilityRespondeat Superior
References
48
Case No. 2021-05-0232
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 15, 2021

Rollins, Kelly v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

Kelly Rollins, an employee of UPS, sustained multiple serious injuries, including a fractured hip, patella, scapula, and lumbar fractures, a right-wrist sprain, and PTSD, following a work-related automobile accident on September 10, 2019. UPS accepted the claim and provided initial medical treatment and temporary total disability benefits until Rollins reached maximum medical improvement on September 15, 2020. Rollins subsequently accepted a voluntary separation offer from UPS. The Court decided the matter on the record, awarding Rollins additional temporary total disability benefits, a lump sum of $115,000.00 for permanent partial disability benefits, and lifetime medical benefits under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(a)(1)(A), with UPS also ordered to reimburse medical report fees and attorney expenses.

Work-related injuryAutomobile accidentFractured hipPTSDPermanent partial disabilityTemporary total disabilityLifetime medical benefitsWorkers' compensation claimVoluntary separationLump sum payment
References
2
Case No. CV-24-1279
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 11, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Michael Howard

Claimant Michael Howard appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying his request to amend his claim to include bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Howard sustained multiple injuries in a 2018 assault, and his claim was later amended for various conditions. His treating physician, Ranga Krishna, diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome in 2021, linking it to the 2018 accident. However, the carrier's consultant found a bilateral wrist sprain but no causally related carpal tunnel syndrome after examinations in 2021 and 2023, citing a lack of corroborative clinical findings despite EMG results. Both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board credited the carrier's consultant, denying the amendment due to insufficient credible evidence of causation. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, deferring to its factual determinations and assessments of medical witness credibility, which were supported by substantial evidence.

Carpal Tunnel SyndromeCausation DisputeMedical Opinion ConflictCredibility of Medical WitnessesSubstantial Evidence ReviewWorkers' Compensation Board AffirmanceClaim Amendment DenialBilateral Wrist InjuryElectromyography FindingsAppellant Burden of Proof
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 13, 2006

Claim of Aposporos v. NYNEX

Claimant applied for workers' compensation benefits in May 1996 for neck and wrist injuries. A compensable injury for her left wrist was established in February 1997, with other injury sites held in abeyance. In March 2006, claimant requested further action to establish an injury to her right wrist. The employer asserted that the Special Disability Fund was liable pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a due to the time elapsed. Both a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Workers’ Compensation Board determined the Fund was not liable, finding the case was not truly closed because the right wrist injury issue was raised in 1996 and remained unresolved. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, stating that substantial evidence supported the finding that the case was not truly closed.

Workers' CompensationSpecial Disability FundCase ReopeningLiabilityUnresolved ClaimWorkers’ Compensation Law § 25-aInjury EstablishmentAppealBoard DecisionSubstantial Evidence
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 450 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