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

Aguilar v. Wenglar Const. Co., Inc.

Jaime Aguilar sued Wenglar Construction Company for injuries sustained during a work-related accident. The trial court granted a take-nothing judgment, ruling Aguilar was a borrowed servant of Wenglar, thus limiting his remedy to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. Aguilar appealed, challenging the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence for both the borrowed servant status and the workers' compensation limitation. The appellate court affirmed Aguilar's status as a borrowed servant. However, it found Wenglar failed to prove it had provided proper notice of its workers' compensation coverage to the Industrial Accident Board, thereby preventing Wenglar from claiming subscriber status under the Act. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial.

Borrowed Servant DoctrineWorkers' Compensation ActNotice RequirementsRight of ControlAffirmative DefenseEmployer LiabilityPersonal InjuryTexas LawAppellate ReviewReversal
References
15
Case No. 04-14-00609-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Irma Lemus and Manuel Lemus v. John Rene Aguilar, Johnny B. Wells, Laura Ashley Wells, and Johnny Montoya Garza

This case involves an appeal concerning the ownership of a property at 106 Cameo in San Antonio, Texas. The primary dispute revolves around two competing deeds: an informal "will" signed in 2005 by Elvira Aguilar and Johnny Montoya Garza, intended to convey the property to Elvira's grandchildren (John Rene Aguilar, Laura Ashley Wells, and Johnny B. Wells), and a formal warranty deed signed in 2009 by Elvira Aguilar to Irma Lemus and Manuel Lemus, Jr. The appellees argue that the 2005 "will" functions as a valid gift deed, establishing their superior title. They contend that Elvira Aguilar lacked the mental capacity due to advanced Alzheimer's disease to execute the 2009 deed, rendering it void. Additionally, the appellees challenge the appellants' claim for reimbursement for property improvements, asserting a lack of good faith given the appellants' awareness of the adverse claims and the timing of the improvements. The authenticity of Elvira's signature on the 2005 document is also defended.

Property LawDeed DisputeMental CapacityAlzheimer's DiseaseGift DeedTrespass to Try TitleAttorneys FeesGood Faith ImprovementsAppellate ProcedureTexas Law
References
41
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network Service L.L.C. v. Ray Aguilar

Ray Aguilar sued his employers, Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network Service, L.L.C., for wrongful termination in violation of the Texas Labor Code Chapter 451, alleging retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim after a workplace injury. Aguilar claimed a hostile work environment, denial of a pay raise, and being pressured into unpaid FMLA leave, leading to his termination for 'job abandonment' without proper notice. A jury found in Aguilar's favor, awarding actual and punitive damages. The appellate court affirmed the findings of retaliation and constructive discharge, concluding there was sufficient evidence that the employers failed to uniformly enforce their absence control policy and showed a causal link between the claim and termination. However, the court reversed the punitive damages award, finding insufficient evidence of actual malice.

Retaliatory DischargeEmployment DiscriminationTexas Labor Code Chapter 451Absence Control PolicyConstructive TerminationFamily Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Exemplary DamagesLegal SufficiencyFactual SufficiencyAppellate Review
References
42
Case No. 08-11-00206-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2012

El Paso County Juvenile Board v. Dolores Aguilar

Dolores Aguilar filed suit against the El Paso County Juvenile Board, alleging retaliatory discharge for filing a worker's compensation claim, in violation of Chapter 451 of the Texas Labor Code. The Juvenile Board asserted governmental immunity and filed a plea to the jurisdiction, which the trial court denied. On appeal, the Eighth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision. The appellate court determined that the El Paso County Juvenile Board qualifies as a political subdivision under Chapter 504 of the Texas Labor Code, meaning its governmental immunity for retaliatory discharge claims under Chapter 451 has not been waived. Consequently, the appellate court dismissed Aguilar's suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, aligning with the precedent set in Travis Central Appraisal District v. Norman.

Governmental ImmunityRetaliatory DischargeWorker's Compensation ClaimPlea to JurisdictionPolitical SubdivisionTexas Labor CodeSovereign ImmunitySubject Matter JurisdictionAppellate ReviewJuvenile Board
References
8
Case No. 08-10-00328-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 17, 2012

Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network Service L.L.C. v. Ray Aguilar

Ray Aguilar, a former employee, sued Echostar Satellite L.L.C. and Dish Network, L.L.C. for wrongful termination under the Texas Labor Code Chapter 451, alleging retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim. A jury found in Aguilar's favor, awarding actual and exemplary damages. On appeal, the Eighth District Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the jury's findings regarding the employer's failure to uniformly enforce its absence control policy, the presence of retaliatory discharge, and constructive termination. However, the court reversed the award of exemplary damages, concluding there was insufficient evidence of actual malice.

Workers' CompensationRetaliatory DischargeAbsence Control PolicyConstructive TerminationExemplary DamagesTexas Labor CodeFMLAJury VerdictAppellate ReviewEmployment Law
References
42
Case No. 533946
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Elliot Vicente

Claimant Elliot Vicente, who suffered a work-related accident in May 2007, was initially classified with a permanent partial disability. Nearing the exhaustion of his 475 weeks of indemnity benefits, he sought reclassification due to extreme hardship under Workers' Compensation Law § 35 (3). A Workers' Compensation Law Judge and subsequently the Workers' Compensation Board reclassified him with a permanent total disability, finding he met the extreme hardship criteria. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending insufficient evidence regarding claimant's Social Security disability benefits. The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding of extreme hardship given claimant's financial shortfall and inability to obtain new employment.

Workers' CompensationExtreme HardshipPermanent Partial DisabilityPermanent Total DisabilityWage-Earning CapacityIndemnity BenefitsReclassificationSocial Security Disability BenefitsFinancial HardshipAppellate Division
References
4
Case No. 01-18-01122-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 12, 2019

Vicente A. Menchaca v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania

Appellant Vicente Menchaca, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal in a workers' compensation case, challenging a final judgment. He also filed a motion to supplement the record, claiming incompleteness, which the Court dismissed as moot, clarifying the correct procedure for supplementing records. The appellate court issued a corrected order and notice of intent to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction, finding Menchaca's notice of appeal to be untimely by one day. Although his premature motion to modify the judgment extended the filing deadline, it was still exceeded. The Court granted Menchaca a 10-day period to file a motion for extension of time and provide a reasonable explanation for the untimely filing to prevent the dismissal of his appeal.

Appellate ProcedureJurisdictionTimeliness of AppealMotion PracticeWorkers' CompensationSummary JudgmentRecord SupplementationTexas Appellate RulesPro Se AppellantExtension of Time
References
29
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 05567 [209 AD3d 1073]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2022

Matter of Vicente (Finger Lakes DDSO)

Elliot Vicente, a claimant with a work-related permanent partial disability from 2007, sought reclassification to permanent total disability under Workers' Compensation Law § 35 (3) due to extreme hardship, as his indemnity benefits were nearing exhaustion. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially granted his application, which the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending insufficient evidence, particularly regarding anticipated Social Security disability benefits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding that substantial evidence supported the finding of extreme hardship based on the claimant's significant financial shortfall in meeting monthly obligations and his documented inability to secure new employment.

Workers' Compensation LawExtreme Hardship RedeterminationPermanent Partial DisabilityWage-Earning Capacity LossIndemnity Benefit ExhaustionSocial Security Disability OffsetsFinancial StrainVocational LimitationsAppellate Division ReviewSubstantial Evidence Standard
References
4
Case No. 14-12-01158-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 04, 2014

Vicente A. Menchaca v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania

Appellant Vicente A. Menchaca was injured on the job in 1994 and received workers’ compensation disability benefits but was denied lifetime income benefits for the alleged total loss of use of both hands. After exhausting administrative remedies, Menchaca sued his employer's carrier, the Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (ICSP), seeking judicial review. The trial court granted summary judgment for ICSP. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that ICSP established Menchaca possessed substantial utility of his hands and that his inability to gain or keep employment was due to unrelated injuries, not the condition of his hands.

Workers' CompensationLifetime Income BenefitsSummary JudgmentJudicial ReviewTotal Loss of UseHands InjuryAppellate AffirmationTexas Labor CodeDisability BenefitsPro Se Appeal
References
12
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 04906 [186 AD3d 1298]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 16, 2020

Aguilar v. Graham Terrace, LLC

The plaintiff, Willan Enrique Macas Aguilar, an employee of subcontractor Atweek, Inc., sustained personal injuries when an unsecured HVAC duct fell on him during demolition work at a renovation site owned by Graham Terrace, LLC, and managed by general contractor Townhouse Builders, Inc. He initiated an action alleging violations of Labor Law §§ 240 (1) and 241 (6). The owner and general contractor filed a third-party claim for contractual indemnification against the subcontractor. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff summary judgment on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability and issued various rulings concerning the indemnification and other Labor Law claims. The Appellate Division modified the lower court's order by denying the owner and general contractor's motion for summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim, while affirming the grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff on Labor Law § 240 (1) liability and the denial of summary judgment to the appellants on the Labor Law § 241 (6) cause of action.

personal injurylabor lawsummary judgmentcontractual indemnificationfalling objectconstruction accidentappellate reviewworker safetypremises liabilityNew York law
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 102 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