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. ADJ8750816
Regular
Jul 31, 2014

KAMIKA BEASLEY vs. SECURITAS, SEDGWICK

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for removal, reversing the prior denial of a change of venue. The applicant demonstrated good cause by residing in Vallejo, her injury occurring in Sacramento, and no longer having an attorney in the original Anaheim venue. Therefore, the case venue was changed to the Oakland district office, and the trial was continued.

Petition for RemovalChange of VenueWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardPresiding Workers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgePetition to Change VenuePetition for Change of VenueGood CauseMandatory Settlement ConferenceApplication for Adjudication of ClaimIndustrial Injury
References
0
Case No. 13-11-00260-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 13, 2011

in Re Fluor Enterprises, Inc. F/K/A Fluor Daniel, Inc.

Fluor Enterprises, Inc. seeks to compel the trial court to transfer the venue of a case from Hidalgo County, Texas, to Dallas County, Texas. The real party in interest, John Joseph Whelan, III, was injured on the job while employed by Fluor and was subsequently terminated. Whelan initially filed suit alleging libel, slander, defamation, and retaliatory discharge, asserting venue was proper in Hidalgo County. Fluor moved to transfer venue, arguing that Dallas County was the mandatory venue for defamation claims and its principal place of business. The trial court denied Fluor's motion to transfer venue. The Court of Appeals, Thirteenth District of Texas, conditionally granted the petition for writ of mandamus, concluding that the trial court erred in refusing to apply the mandatory venue provision applicable to defamation claims, despite Whelan's attempts to amend pleadings on the day of the hearing.

Venue TransferWrit of MandamusDefamation ClaimsRetaliatory DischargeMandatory Venue ProvisionTrial Court ErrorHidalgo County, TexasDallas County, TexasPleadings AmendmentWorkers' Compensation Claim
References
18
Case No. 13-09-00443-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 12, 2010

in Re: Adan Volpe Properties, Ltd. and Maricela Volpe as General Partner

Adan Volpe Properties, Ltd. and Maricela Volpe (relators) filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging a trial court's order to transfer venue. The relators' original lawsuit in Hidalgo County alleged fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy, defamation, libel, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, racketeering, and sought injunctive relief. The trial court granted motions by Donato Volpe Jr., Eustorgio Perez, and Luis Antonio Figueroa (real parties in interest) to transfer venue to Webb County, based on mandatory venue provisions for injunctions. The Thirteenth District of Texas Court of Appeals reviewed whether the injunctive relief sought by relators was primary or ancillary to their claims for damages. The appellate court concluded that the injunctive relief was ancillary, thus section 65.023 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which mandates venue for primarily injunctive suits, did not apply. The petition for writ of mandamus was conditionally granted, ordering the trial court to withdraw its venue transfer order.

MandamusVenue TransferCivil ProcedureInjunctive ReliefAncillary ClaimsFraudBreach of Fiduciary DutyDefamationRacketeeringTexas Court of Appeals
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kshatrya v. Texas Workforce Commission

Bakulesh Kshatrya appealed the trial court’s order granting the Texas Workforce Commission’s (TWC) and Riddle Technologies, Inc.’s pleas to the jurisdiction. The trial court dismissed Kshatrya’s claims, asserting a lack of jurisdiction due to his failure to file suit in the statutorily mandated county and struck his common law claims for fraud and breach of contract. Kshatrya contended that the proper county requirement was a matter of venue, not jurisdiction, which the defendants had waived by not filing a motion to transfer venue. The appellate court agreed, concluding that the venue provision in the Texas Labor Code was not a jurisdictional prerequisite, thereby rendering the trial court's dismissal for want of jurisdiction erroneous. The court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its opinion, declining to rule on the common law claims due to an insufficient record.

JurisdictionVenueSovereign ImmunityTexas Labor CodeWage ClaimAppealsCivil ProcedureStatutory InterpretationPleadingDismissal
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Plains Insurance Co. v. Acuna

Isaías Acuna filed a worker's compensation suit in Maverick County for an injury sustained in Lubbock County. Plains Insurance Company, the defendant, moved to transfer the case to Lubbock County, arguing that the injury occurred there and Acuna resided there at the time. The trial court denied this motion. Plains Insurance Company appealed this interlocutory order. The appellate court found no probative evidence to support a finding that Acuna had a second, permanent residence in Maverick County at the time of injury, concluding his residence was Lubbock County. The court also clarified that a motion to transfer is the proper vehicle for challenging venue in such a case. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order and rendered a decision to transfer the cause to a district court in Lubbock County.

Worker's CompensationVenue TransferResidence DeterminationInterlocutory Order AppealTexas LawCivil ProcedureAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceJudicial District
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hefner v. Grievance Committee for District 1-A

Hefner appealed the dismissal of his suit to set aside a private reprimand issued by the District 1-A Grievance Committee of the State Bar of Texas. The trial court dismissed the suit, asserting a lack of jurisdiction because Hefner did not reside in Dallas County, as per the statute. The appellate court determined that the statutory requirement to file suit in the county of residence was a matter of venue, not jurisdiction. Due to the Grievance Committee's failure to properly challenge venue according to Rule 86 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, the improper venue was waived. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's dismissal and remanded the case for a trial on the merits of Hefner's reprimand.

VenueJurisdictionWaiverPrivate ReprimandState Bar of TexasTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureTrial Court ErrorReversalRemandAppellate Procedure
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

O'Connor v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre

The plaintiff appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, which granted the defendant’s motion to transfer a personal injury action from Bronx County to Nassau County. The plaintiff had initially placed venue in Bronx County based on his alleged residence at the time of commencement in December 1994. However, discovery revealed that Workers’ Compensation documents indicated the plaintiff had changed his address to Suffern, Rockland County, in July 1994, meaning he did not reside in Bronx County when the action was commenced. The defendant subsequently moved to transfer the action, citing the plaintiff's true residence and the inconvenience to material witnesses of a trial in Bronx County. The appellate court affirmed the order, concluding that the plaintiff resided in Rockland County at the time the action commenced and that the defendant had promptly moved to change venue after ascertaining the plaintiff’s actual residence.

Personal InjuryVenue TransferChange of VenueAppellate ReviewCPLRResidence DisputeWorkers' Compensation DocumentsNassau County Supreme CourtBronx CountyRockland County
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Landbase, Inc. v. Texas Employment Commission

This appeal challenges an administrative decision of the Texas Employment Commission (TEC) under the Texas Payday Law. Terry L. Bailey, a former employee of Landbase, Inc., filed a Payday Law claim, resulting in a decision in his favor. Landbase sought judicial review in Bexar County, but the TEC filed a plea to the jurisdiction, arguing that the Payday Law mandates venue in the claimant's county of residence (Guadalupe County). The trial court dismissed the case with prejudice for want of jurisdiction. Landbase appealed, contending that the venue provision should not be jurisdictional and that dismissal was improper. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal, holding that the statutory venue provisions are exclusive and jurisdictional, following precedent. The court also found no harmful error in the trial court's failure to provide findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Administrative LawVenueJurisdictionStatutory ConstructionPayday LawEmployment LawJudicial ReviewDismissal with PrejudiceFindings of FactConclusions of Law
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States Fire Insurance v. Alvarez

United States Fire Insurance Company (U.S. Fire) appealed an order from a Texas trial court that overruled its plea of privilege in a workers’ compensation case. Rosa and Manuel Alvarez had initiated the suit in Webb County to appeal an Industrial Accident Board award. U.S. Fire contended that venue should be in Dallas County, its place of residence, arguing the injured worker, Tranquelino Alvarez, was an exempt farm laborer and not covered by the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. The plaintiffs asserted that venue was proper in Webb County due to the worker's residence there at the time of injury and death, as per specific provisions of Texas statutes. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's ruling, concluding that proof of a 'covered employee' status was an issue for the trial on the merits, not a prerequisite venue fact in a plea of privilege hearing for a workers' compensation case.

workers' compensationvenueplea of privilegefarm laborer exemptioncovered employeeappellate procedureTexas lawjurisdictionstatutory interpretationIndustrial Accident Board
References
15
Case No. 03-11-00310-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 18, 2012

Refugio Robles Rayas v. Texas Mutual Insurance Company and Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania

Refugio Robles Rayas, a citizen of Mexico injured while working in Texas on an H-2B visa, appealed the transfer of venue in his workers' compensation claim. He initially filed suit in Maverick County against Texas Mutual Insurance Company and Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (ICSOP). The trial court granted the motions to transfer venue and moved the suit to Travis County, where it subsequently granted summary judgment in favor of Texas Mutual and ICSOP. Rayas argued that Maverick County was the mandatory and proper venue because of its proximity to his residence in Mexico, as per the Texas Labor Code. However, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling that the labor code's mandatory venue provision for the employee's county of residence did not apply to a non-resident of Texas. Consequently, the general venue rule, making Travis County a proper venue due to Texas Mutual's principal place of business, was correctly applied. The court also rejected Rayas's arguments regarding violations of the 'open courts' provision and due process rights.

Workers' CompensationVenue TransferJudicial ReviewSummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewTexas Labor CodeTexas Civil Practice & Remedies CodeOpen Courts ProvisionDue ProcessNon-resident Claimant
References
24
Showing 1-10 of 14,626 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