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. 13-16-00346-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 06, 2018

Fatih Ozcelebi, M. D. v. K. v. Chowdary, M. D., Individually and D/B/A Valley Gastroenterology Clinic, P. A.: Valley Gastroenterology Clinic P. A.

Appellant, Fatih Ozcelebi, M.D., appealed various rulings in a long-standing dispute with appellees K.V. Chowdary, M.D., and Valley Gastroenterology Clinic, P.A. (VGC). The case stemmed from an employment agreement with non-compete and liquidated damages clauses, which Dr. Ozcelebi allegedly breached by leaving VGC early and starting his own practice. Dr. Chowdary sued for breach of contract and fiduciary duty, while Dr. Ozcelebi filed counterclaims including RICO, ERISA, and others. The trial court granted special exceptions against Dr. Ozcelebi's pleadings for improper verification and subsequently granted summary judgments in favor of Dr. Chowdary. Additionally, Dr. Ozcelebi was sanctioned for failing to attend a court-ordered mediation with his attorney. The Court of Appeals affirmed all of the trial court's judgments and orders.

Employment LawContract DisputeNon-Compete AgreementLiquidated DamagesBreach of Fiduciary DutyCivil ProcedureSummary JudgmentDiscovery SanctionsMediation SanctionsERISA Preemption
References
50
Case No. W2012-02144-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 09, 2013

George R. Vraney, M.D. v. Medical Specialty Clinic, P.A.

This case involves a breach of contract dispute between Dr. George R. Vraney and Medical Specialty Clinic, P.C. Dr. Vraney sued the Clinic for breach of an employment agreement, while the Clinic counter-sued for breach of contract, breach of duty of loyalty, and conversion. The trial court initially granted summary judgment to the Clinic on some claims and determined damages. On appeal, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee found that remaining questions of law and fact precluded the grant of summary judgment on certain issues, although it affirmed the denial of Dr. Vraney's claim for unpaid vacation time and the referral of damages to a Special Master. The case is reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.

Employment LawContract DisputePhysician EmploymentMedical PracticeBreach of Duty of LoyaltySummary Judgment ReversalAppellate ProcedureJudicial RecusalDamages CalculationAccounts Receivable Dispute
References
78
Case No. No. 08-07-00346-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 24, 2010

W.C. LaRock, D.C., P.C. D/B/A Auto & Work Injury Clinic and Maria Del Carmen Gallardo/Rosemary Smith v. Rosemary Smith/W.C. LaRock, D.C., P.C. D/B/A Auto & Work Injury Clinic and Maria Del Carmen Gallardo

Rosemary Smith, an El Paso Police Officer, sued W.C. LaRock, D.C., P.C., d/b/a Auto & Work Injury Clinic, and its employee Maria Gallardo, alleging negligence after a physical therapy session aggravated a prior back injury. The City of El Paso, Smith's worker's compensation subrogee, joined as a plaintiff. The jury found Gallardo negligent, awarding Smith $488,000, which the trial court reduced to $339,983.58. Both parties appealed. The Court of Appeals found the expert testimony on causation insufficient to establish that Gallardo's therapy proximately caused Smith's reherniation, as the expert only stated it was "possible." The court reversed the trial court's judgment.

Medical MalpracticeNegligenceCausationExpert TestimonyPhysical TherapyHerniated DiscSpinal SurgeryProximate CauseLegal SufficiencyAppeal
References
33
Case No. 03-03-00435-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 29, 2004

Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Richard Reynolds, in His Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission/East Side Surgical Center Clinic for Special Surgery And Surgical and Diagnostic Center, L.P. v. East Side Surgical Center Clinic for Special Surgery/Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Richard Reynolds, in His Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Workers' Compensation Commission

This case involves the Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission's failure to establish fee guidelines for ambulatory surgical centers under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. East Side Surgical Center, Clinic for Special Surgery, and intervenor Surgical and Diagnostic Center, L.P. (collectively "East Side") sued the Commission to invalidate certain default rules that applied when specific guidelines were absent. The district court declared one rule (133.304(i)) invalid and enjoined its enforcement, citing unlawful delegation of authority. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the district court's judgment regarding the rule's invalidity and dissolved the injunction, citing a Texas Supreme Court decision finding no unlawful delegation. The court affirmed that East Side was not entitled to its usual and customary fee in the absence of specific guidelines.

Workers' CompensationAdministrative LawDelegation of AuthorityRulemakingAmbulatory Surgical CentersJudicial ReviewInsurance CarrierFee GuidelinesFair and Reasonable RatesStatutory Interpretation
References
38
Case No. 14-19-00145-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 04, 2021

Regional Specialty Clinic, P.A. v. S.A Randle & Associates, P.C. and Sarnie A. Randle, Jr.

This appeal originates from a dispute between Regional Specialty Clinic, P.A. (clinic) and attorney S.A. Randle & Associates, P.C. and Sarnie A. Randle, Jr. (lawyer) over unpaid medical services. The clinic sought payment from the lawyer for treatment provided to his client, Patrick Cuba, alleging an assignment of benefits from Cuba and asserting claims including tortious interference, money had and received, unjust enrichment, and breach of a third-party beneficiary contract. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the lawyer on all claims. On review, the appellate court affirmed the summary judgment concerning tortious interference, money had and received, and unjust enrichment. However, the court reversed and remanded the claim for breach of a third-party beneficiary contract, finding the lawyer's motion for summary judgment was insufficient regarding one of the underlying settlement agreements.

Personal Injury LitigationMedical Billing DisputeAttorney MalpracticeSummary Judgment ReviewContract InterferenceEquitable ClaimsThird-Party BeneficiaryAppellate ProcedureTexas CourtsLegal Ethics
References
31
Case No. 14-95-00363-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 19, 1996

Operation Rescue-National v. Planned Parenthood of Houston & Southeast Texas, Inc.

Appellants, anti-abortion groups and leaders, appealed a judgment awarding damages and permanently enjoining them from interfering with appellees' clinics and homes. The judgment stemmed from jury findings of civil conspiracy, tortious interference, invasion of privacy, and property rights against Planned Parenthood and other clinics/doctors. Appellants challenged the injunction's constitutionality and evidentiary sufficiency. The Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the trial court's decision, finding adequate evidence and upholding the injunction's constitutionality under both federal and state law, and confirmed the damage awards.

Anti-abortion protestsInjunctionCivil conspiracyTortious interferenceInvasion of privacyProperty rightsActual damagesPunitive damagesFreedom of speechFirst Amendment
References
12
Case No. E2003-03059-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2004

Jerry Bales v. Dialysis Clinic, Inc.

Jerry Bales filed a retaliatory discharge claim against Dialysis Clinic, Inc., alleging he was terminated for filing a workers' compensation claim after a shoulder injury. Bales received medical treatment, surgeries, and temporary total disability benefits, but was placed on medical leave and subsequently terminated after exhausting his leave. The employer asserted Bales was terminated because he was unable to perform his job due to medical restrictions, and no light duty work was available. The Trial Court granted summary judgment for the employer, finding Bales failed to establish a causal link between his workers' compensation claim and termination. The Court of Appeals affirmed, emphasizing that a plaintiff must prove a causal relationship and that inability to perform essential job functions constitutes a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for discharge, consistent with established precedent.

Retaliatory DischargeWorkers Compensation ClaimSummary JudgmentCausal LinkEmployee DisabilityJob RestrictionsMedical LeaveAffirmedTennessee Court of AppealsEmployment Law
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Martin v. Clinical Pathology Laboratories, Inc.

Appellant Joyce Martin sued Clinical Pathology Laboratories, Inc. (CPL) for wrongful termination, alleging she was fired for leaving work early to vote. The trial court dismissed her case, and Martin appealed. The appellate court first addressed Martin's standing to sue, concluding that despite filing for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, she retained standing as her claim revested in her upon the confirmation of her bankruptcy plan. On the merits, Martin argued for a new common-law exception to the employment-at-will doctrine, citing Texas public policy and the Texas Election Code. However, the appellate court declined to create such an exception, emphasizing the legislature's role in defining exceptions to the at-will doctrine and noting that Martin's pleadings did not definitively show a violation of the Election Code. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment of dismissal.

wrongful terminationemployment at willright to voteTexas Election Codepublic policy exceptionChapter 13 bankruptcystandingappellate reviewcase dismissalemployer retaliation
References
42
Case No. 08-19-00067-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 06, 2020

Clinical Pathology Laboratories Inc. v. Juan Polo

This case involves an appeal concerning the application of the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) in a wrongful discharge lawsuit. Clinical Pathology Laboratories (CPL) terminated employee Juan Polo after he suffered a work-related injury and filed a worker's compensation claim. Polo sued CPL for retaliatory discharge under Chapter 451 of the Texas Labor Code. CPL filed a motion to dismiss under the TCPA, arguing Polo's claims were based on its exercise of free speech and right of association regarding matters of public concern (health and safety related to its lab services). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of CPL's motion, concluding that Polo's lawsuit was based on CPL's conduct of termination, not specific communications, and that CPL failed to show the communications related to a matter of public concern as distinct from its private pecuniary interests.

Workers' CompensationRetaliatory DischargeTexas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA)Free SpeechRight of AssociationPublic ConcernPrivate DisputeEmployment LawAppealEl Paso
References
40
Case No. W2013-01540-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 10, 2014

William H. Fleming v. Tejinder Saini, M.D. and Healthquest Clinic

This appeal concerns the denial of a post-judgment motion regarding court costs in a civil warrant lawsuit. Plaintiff William H. Fleming sued Tejinder Saini, M.D., and Healthquest Clinic for negligence related to unreturned medical paperwork in a workers' compensation matter. The trial court dismissed the lawsuit for non-compliance with the Tennessee Medical Malpractice Act and assessed court costs against Fleming. Fleming filed two motions to alter or amend the judgment, arguing he should not bear costs as he ultimately retrieved his documents. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding the second post-judgment motion untimely and no abuse of discretion in denying the request to reconsider court costs.

Medical MalpracticePost-Judgment MotionCourt CostsAppeal TimelinessDismissal with PrejudiceWorkers' CompensationNegligenceTennessee Rules of Civil ProcedureTennessee Rules of Appellate ProcedureAbuse of Discretion
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 212 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