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. No. 08-19-00272-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 10, 2021

Max Grossman/City of El Paso v. City of El Paso/Max Grossman

This case involves an appeal from the 384th District Court of El Paso County, Texas, regarding a dispute over the City of El Paso's plan to build a multipurpose arena. Appellant Max Grossman challenged the project, particularly the demolition of buildings in the Duranguito neighborhood for the arena's footprint, citing violations of the Texas Antiquities Code. The litigation's progression included multiple lawsuits concerning bond validity, sovereign immunity of the City, and the legality of permits issued by the Texas Historical Commission (THC). The primary legal issues revolve around the waiver of governmental immunity for the City under the Antiquities Code and whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a temporary injunction against the project. Grossman contended the City's archeological survey design was inadequate to protect potential Mescalero Apache "Peace Camp" artifacts. The dissent argues against the majority's implicit finding of immunity waiver and supports the trial court's denial of the temporary injunction, emphasizing that the Antiquities Code does not unambiguously waive governmental immunity and and that the THC has broad discretion in approving archeological survey plans.

Governmental ImmunitySovereign ImmunityTexas Antiquities CodeArcheological SurveyTemporary InjunctionUltra Vires ClaimBond ReferendumEl Paso Arena ProjectHistorical PreservationJudicial Discretion
References
49
Case No. 2016-02-0110
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 02, 2018

Christmas, David v. Morristown Logistics

David Christmas, an employee, filed an Expedited Hearing Request for medical benefits related to a settled 2015 low-back injury. He was discharged from pain management by Dr. Miguel Castrejon after testing positive for alcohol and THC, leading Morristown Logistics to deny further treatment. The employer argued a violation of an unwritten pain management agreement and statutory compliance. The Court found Mr. Christmas did not violate a signed, written agreement required for termination of benefits under Tennessee law, and concluded his actions were unintentional. As continued pain management was recommended by Dr. Castrejon, the Court granted the relief, ordering Morristown Logistics to provide a panel of pain management specialists.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingMedical BenefitsPain ManagementDrug TestingTreatment ComplianceAlcohol UseTHC UseEmployer DenialSettlement Agreement
References
1
Case No. 01-03-00817-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 26, 2004

Bobby Andrews v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

Bobby Andrews, an African-American former employee of Exxon Mobil Corporation, appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Exxon in his racial discrimination lawsuit. Andrews was terminated after his urine specimen tested positive for THC, violating Exxon's Alcohol and Drug Use Policy during his training for a designated supervisory position. He argued that Exxon's reason for termination was a pretext for racial discrimination and that other non-protected employees were treated differently. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that Andrews failed to establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination because he did not prove he was qualified for a drug-free workplace or that others under 'nearly identical circumstances' were treated more favorably.

Employment DiscriminationRacial DiscriminationSummary JudgmentDrug Testing PolicyEmployee TerminationPretext CasePrima Facie CaseTexas Labor CodeMarijuana UseTHC Positive Test
References
13
Case No. 2017-02-0207
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 05, 2017

Guinn, Shannon Scott v. Barnard Roofing Company

In this interlocutory appeal, the employer sought to compel the employee's estate representatives to sign a medical release for a second toxicology screening of a decedent's blood sample. The employee, Shannon Guinn, died after a tragic fall at work. An initial toxicology report by Aegis Sciences Corporation indicated a positive result for Carboxy-THC, but the security seal was missing, and the level was below 'presumptively positive' thresholds for a confirmation test. The trial court denied the employer's motion, finding a lack of 'good cause' as no evidence showed the laboratory required a release or court order for further testing. The Appeals Board affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding there was no abuse of discretion, and remanded the case for additional proceedings.

toxicology screeningdrug testingCarboxy-THCmedical releasemotion to compelgood causechain of custodydrug-free workplace programpost-accident testingabuse of discretion
References
8
Case No. Docket No. 2017-07-0073; State File No. 81955-2016
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 20, 2018

Kizer, Jared v. Express Services, Inc.

Employee Jared Kizer suffered an amputation injury to his right hand while operating a machine for Express Services, Inc., a participant in Tennessee's Drug-Free Workplace Program. Following a positive post-accident drug test for THC, the employer denied the claim. The trial court initially concluded the employee rebutted the presumption that his drug use was the proximate cause of the injury by clear and convincing evidence. However, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board reversed this decision, finding the employee failed to meet the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that his drug use was not the proximate cause, despite issues with machine guarding and employee training also being noted. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationDrug-Free Workplace ProgramProximate CauseAmputation InjuryMachine SafetyTHC Positive TestToxicology ReportMedical Expert TestimonyOccupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) ReportStatutory Presumption
References
16
Case No. 03-21-00571-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2023

Texas Department of State Health Services, and Dr. Jennifer A. Shuford, in Her Official Capacity as Commissioner of the Texas Department of State Health Services v. Sky Marketing Corp., D/B/A Hometown Hero Create a Cig Temple, LLC Darrell Surif And David Walden

The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) and its Commissioner appealed a trial court's denial of their plea to the jurisdiction and the granting of a temporary injunction. The injunction prevented DSHS from enforcing amendments to controlled substance definitions and a website rule concerning Delta-8 THC. Appellees argued the Commissioner acted beyond her authority (ultra vires) and violated the Texas Administrative Procedure Act by failing to follow proper procedures for schedule modifications. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that appellees had standing and presented valid ultra vires and APA claims. The appellate court also upheld the temporary injunction, citing the appellees' probable right to relief and the likelihood of imminent and irreparable harm.

Hemp legalizationDelta-8 THCControlled Substances Act (TCSA)Administrative Procedure Act (APA)Ultra ViresTemporary InjunctionSovereign ImmunityPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Department of State Health Services (DSHS)Cannabis regulation
References
64
Case No. 11-24-00084-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 08, 2024

In the Interest of D.K., a Child v. the State of Texas

This case involves the appeal of a final order terminating the parental rights of the mother and father to their child, D.K. The child tested positive for methamphetamine and THC at birth due to the mother's drug use. Both parents were uncooperative with the Department of Family and Protective Services, failing to provide identifying information or engage in required services. The father, in particular, had sporadic contact, was incarcerated at various times, and did not complete his service plan. He failed to appear at the final hearing, citing transportation issues, and his request to appear electronically was denied by the trial court, which emphasized the importance of physical presence for credibility assessment. The appellate court affirmed the termination for both parents, deeming the mother's appeal frivolous and finding no preserved due process violation for the father, nor any merit to his claim.

Parental Rights TerminationChild WelfareDue Process ViolationAppellate ProcedureSubstance AbuseChild NeglectCourtroom AppearanceFrivolous AppealAnders BriefBest Interest of Child
References
39
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ryan v. Carroll

Susan Ryan, a probationary police officer, was terminated from the City of New Rochelle Police Department after failing a random drug test for THC. She disputed the results, undergoing independent tests that came back negative, and sought reconsideration. Commissioner Carroll upheld the termination after an internal investigation. Ryan then filed a federal lawsuit alleging violations of her constitutional due process rights due to stigmatizing disclosure and wrongful termination, including a prior Article 78 proceeding challenging the denial of worker's compensation benefits. The District Court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, dismissing Ryan's claims for lack of evidence of wrongful disclosure by defendants and the availability of an adequate state post-deprivation procedure for her procedural due process claim. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining Article 78 claim.

Due Process ViolationLiberty Interest DeprivationSummary Judgment GrantedPolice Officer TerminationDrug Test ChallengeProbationary Employment RightsPublic Disclosure of InformationDefamation ClaimSection 1983 ActionArticle 78 Review
References
18
Case No. 2017-07-0073
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 09, 2018

Kizer, Jared v. Express Employment

Mr. Kizer, an employee, sustained a right-hand amputation while operating a machine at Pinnacle Foods, a client of his employer, Express Employment. His claim for workers' compensation was initially denied by Express, a participant in the Tennessee Drug Free Workplace Program, due to a positive post-accident drug test for THC. Mr. Kizer argued the injury was caused by a machine malfunction and inadequate training, not drug impairment. The Court found Mr. Kizer successfully rebutted the statutory presumption that drug use was the proximate cause, citing evidence of machine defects, lack of proper safety training, and expert testimony disputing impairment at the time of injury. Consequently, the Court ordered Express to pay for Mr. Kizer's medical bills and ongoing treatment, designating Dr. Michael Dolan as the authorized treating physician. However, his request for temporary disability benefits was denied due to insufficient evidence regarding his eligibility for such benefits.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityDrug Free Workplace ProgramIllegal Drug UseProximate CauseMachine MalfunctionAmputationRight Hand InjurySafety Protocols
References
7
Showing 1-9 of 9 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