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. 09-06-287 CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2007

William N. Hawkins and Alex Strange v. Vivian Walker and Baptist Hospitals of Southest Texas D/B/A Memorial Hermann Baptist Hospital East

This wrongful death medical malpractice case involved appellants William N. Hawkins and Alex Strange appealing a jury's damage award to Vivian Walker and Alex Strange for the death of Shiketa Walker, Vivian's daughter and Alex's daughter. Shiketa died from a ruptured tubal ectopic pregnancy after receiving care from Dr. William N. Hawkins and Dr. Steven L. Kastl at different hospitals. The jury found both doctors negligent, allocating 40% fault to Dr. Hawkins and 60% to Dr. Kastl. Vivian Walker was awarded $1,700,000 for non-pecuniary damages and $5,000 for funeral expenses, while Alex Strange received $7,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed the legal sufficiency but found factual insufficiency for Vivian Walker's damage award, necessitating a reversal and remand for a new trial on her claims. Conversely, the court affirmed the judgment concerning Alex Strange's claims, determining that the jury's $7,000 award was not against the greater weight of the evidence.

wrongful deathmedical malpracticenegligencecausationdamagesfactual sufficiencylegal sufficiencymental anguishloss of companionshipectopic pregnancy
References
33
Case No. 02-22-00345-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 31, 2023

Vivian Casper v. Texas Woman's University, Abigail Tilton, Shannon Scott, Genevieve West, Symone Osieko, Carine Feyten, Carolyn Kapinus, and Katherine Antwi Green

Vivian Casper, a tenured professor at Texas Woman’s University (TWU), was placed on paid administrative leave after a student filed a complaint alleging racial and disability discrimination. Casper sued TWU and seven administrators, claiming violations of her due process and free speech rights. The trial court granted Appellees' plea to the jurisdiction, asserting immunity. On appeal, Casper argued the administrators were not immune, she properly pleaded due process and First Amendment violations, and the trial court erred by denying jurisdictional discovery. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding Casper failed to plead actionable property or liberty interests and did not demonstrate ultra vires conduct regarding her First Amendment claims.

Academic FreedomDue ProcessFirst AmendmentSovereign ImmunityPlea to JurisdictionPublic EmploymentTenured ProfessorAdministrative LeaveDiscrimination AllegationsOfficial Capacity Speech
References
91
Case No. 03-05-00032-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 04, 2007

Board of Medical Examiners for the State of Texas and Donald W. Patrick, M.D., J.D., as Executive Director of the Board of Medical Examiners for the State of Texas v. Vivian Adaobi O. Nzedu, M.D.

The Texas State Board of Medical Examiners denied Dr. Vivian Nzedu's medical license application, citing her failure to pass the USMLE within the statutorily permitted attempts. The Board included an examination attempt made prior to the effective date of the 'three-attempts statute' (September 1, 1993). The trial court initially sided with Dr. Nzedu, ruling that pre-1993 attempts should not be counted. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, concluding that counting pre-statute examination attempts is not an unconstitutional retroactive application of the Medical Practice Act, as it merely draws upon antecedent facts and does not impair a vested right. The court deferred to the Board's reasonable interpretation of the statute. The case was remanded for a determination of attorneys' fees.

Medical LicensingUSMLEStatutory InterpretationRetroactivityVested RightsAdministrative LawTexas Medical Practice ActPhysician LicensureExamination RequirementsAppellate Review
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Guajardo v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

Jesus Guajardo appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company concerning his bad-faith claims for denied workers' compensation benefits. Guajardo, injured in 1986, alleged Liberty Mutual violated its common-law duty of good faith and fair dealing and the Texas Insurance Code by stopping his weekly benefits. The trial court had ruled that Liberty Mutual had a reasonable basis for denial, relying on a medical opinion, and that Guajardo's bad-faith suit was barred by the statute of limitations. However, the appellate court reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding the reasonableness of benefit denial given conflicting medical reports and continuous correspondence. It further determined that the bad-faith claims were not time-barred, as the amended petition related back to the original filing, not introducing a wholly new transaction.

Workers' CompensationBad Faith ClaimInsurance LawSummary JudgmentStatute of LimitationsDuty of Good Faith and Fair DealingMedical Opinion DiscrepancyDenial of BenefitsAppealTexas Law
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 21, 1988

In re James P.

This case involves a child protective petition filed against Ronald J. and Vivian P. concerning three children: James P., Ronald J., Jr., and Shaila J. The Family Court in New York County initially dismissed the petition. However, the appellate court reversed this dismissal, reinstating the petition and making new findings. Specifically, it found that James P. is an abused child by Ronald J., and James P., Ronald J., Jr., and Shaila J. are neglected children by Vivian P. The matter was remanded for a dispositional hearing before a different judge. The decision highlights the importance of corroborating out-of-court statements made by children regarding abuse or neglect, supported by expert testimony.

child protective petitionchild abusechild neglectsexual abusefamily courtappellate reviewcredibility of witnessesexpert testimonycorroborationremand
References
2
Case No. 07-04-0007-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 26, 2004

Vivian Coons v. Hockley County Appraisal District

This document addresses an agreed motion for consolidation of four appellate cases and a briefing schedule, granting the motion in part for record and brief filing and denying it in all other respects. The substantive appeal primarily concerns R.W. versus Amarillo National Bank (ANB). R.W. appealed a summary judgment regarding the interpretation of Charles Veigel's will, specifically whether interests bequeathed to Robert and Mabel were life estates or part of a trust. The court modified the summary judgment to declare that the will granted life estates free of trust. Additionally, R.W. challenged the trial court's finding that claims against ANB for disgorgement of fees, an accounting, and damages were barred by limitations. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment on these issues, concluding that claims for fees were moot, accounting claims were waived, and damages claims were time-barred, rejecting arguments based on the Texas Property Code, continuing tort, and counterclaims.

Appellate ProcedureSummary JudgmentTrustsLife EstateStatute of LimitationsFiduciary DutyCounterclaimContinuing TortWill ConstructionTexas Property Code
References
10
Case No. 07-04-0345-CV, 07-05-0186-CV, 07-05-0253-CV, 07-05-0311-CV, 07-05-0439-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 13, 2006

in the Guardianship of Vivian Jackson, an Incapacitated Person

This case involves an order from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh District of Texas. Initially, several appeals concerning "In re: Vivian Jackson, an Incapacitated Person" were dismissed at the appellants' request. The document then details a separate appeal brought by the State Office of Risk Management (SORM) concerning worker's compensation death benefits for Officer Jose Herrera. SORM challenged the determination that Herrera was acting in the service of the State at the time of his death, which would make SORM responsible for benefits. The trial court dismissed SORM's petition for judicial review, ruling it was filed too late. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that the issue was one of "compensability," allowing SORM 40 days for judicial review, and thus SORM's petition was timely. The cause was remanded for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationAppellate ProcedureJudicial ReviewCompensabilityCourse and Scope of EmploymentJurisdictionStatutory InterpretationTimelinessDeath BenefitsGovernment Code
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas General Indemnity Company v. Luce

Vivian Luce, an employee of Wyatt’s Cafeteria, recovered $4,156.24 from Texas General Indemnity Company in a workmen's compensation suit. The insurer appealed, arguing there was no evidence or insufficient evidence to support the finding that Luce was in the course and scope of her employment when injured. Luce was on vacation and had returned to the cafeteria to collect her pay in cash, as required by her employer. After receiving payment, she walked behind the serving line to greet co-workers and sustained an injury. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, reasoning that the employer's requirement for in-person pay collection implies an expectation of minor social interactions, and a brief greeting to co-workers did not constitute a deviation from employment that would remove her from coverage under the Texas Compensation Act.

Course of EmploymentScope of EmploymentDeviation from EmploymentOn-Premises InjuryCollecting PaySocial Interaction at WorkAffirmed JudgmentEmployee InjuryEmployer LiabilityVacation Pay Collection
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wausau Insurance Co. v. Dorsett

The case involves an interlocutory appeal concerning the duration of temporary total disability (TTD) benefits under Tennessee's Workers' Compensation Act. Employee Vivian Alvina Dorsett suffered a spider bite injury and subsequent chronic conditions, leading Wausau Insurance Company to pay TTD benefits. The trial court ordered continued TTD payments beyond the statutory 400-week cap, as Dorsett had not reached maximum medical improvement (MMI). The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed this decision, affirming that the 400-week "maximum total benefit" limitation explicitly applies to TTD benefits, with permanent total disability being the sole exemption. The Court concluded that it lacks the authority to alter statutory definitions, remanding the case for further proceedings consistent with the 400-week TTD limit.

Temporary Total DisabilityMaximum Medical ImprovementWorkers' Compensation ActStatutory Interpretation400-Week LimitationSpider Bite InjuryGenetic Enzyme DeficiencyPyoderma GangrenosumInterlocutory AppealRemand
References
16
Case No. 13-09-00536-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 30, 2011

Ernest Belmarez, Eddie Guajardo, William Phillips, Chris Shannon, Ramico Ramos, and Norma Mayorga v. Formosa Plastics Corporation Texas, Formosa Plastics Corporation, U.S.A.

This appeal stems from a personal injury lawsuit following a fire and explosions at Formosa Plastics Corporation's plant in Point Comfort, Texas, on October 6, 2005. Appellants, including Ernest Belmarez and five others, who were not Formosa employees but worked at the plant, claimed injuries while evacuating and sued Formosa, a forklift operator, and several contractors. After a jury returned a take-nothing verdict, the plaintiffs appealed, raising five issues. These issues primarily contested the trial court's exclusion of a Taproot Incident Report, OSHA citations, and Social Security disability findings, and the admission of evidence concerning their failure to file workers' compensation claims, along with arguments regarding counsel's conduct. The Thirteenth District Court of Texas affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no reversible error in its evidentiary rulings or the jury arguments.

Personal InjuryIndustrial AccidentPlant FireExplosionsEvidentiary RulingsSubsequent Remedial MeasuresOSHA CitationsSocial Security DisabilityJury ArgumentAppellate Review
References
15
Showing 1-10 of 27 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