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. 03-06-00631-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 26, 2009

Samuel Campos v. Texas Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association for Reliance National Indemnity Company, an Impaired Carrier

Samuel Campos, an employee, was injured on the job, leading to disputes over his impairment rating and reimbursement for travel expenses. The Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission affirmed a designated doctor's 6% impairment rating and denied travel expenses, which Campos challenged in court. The case involved the Texas Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association (TPCIGA) because Campos's employer's insurer became impaired. Initially filed in Winkler County, the case was transferred to Travis County, where TPCIGA was granted summary judgment. The Third District Court of Appeals reversed the summary judgment, ruling that the Workers' Compensation Act's specific mandatory venue provision, which places venue in the county of the employee's residence at the time of injury (Winkler County), overrides the Guaranty Act's general venue provision, which would place it in Travis County. The court remanded the case with instructions to transfer it to Winkler County.

Workers' CompensationVenue DisputeMandatory VenueStatutory ConstructionTexas Labor CodeTexas Insurance CodeImpairment RatingTravel Expenses ReimbursementJudicial ReviewAppellate Procedure
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Richardson v. Apfel

Plaintiff Barbara Richardson challenged the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) disability benefits. The District Court found that the Commissioner committed legal error by failing to adequately develop the administrative record regarding Richardson's mental impairments and by improperly dismissing new evidence from treating physicians without seeking further clinical support. The court also determined that the use of Medical-Vocational Guidelines was inappropriate due to Richardson's significant nonexertional impairments, necessitating the testimony of a vocational expert. The case was remanded to the Commissioner for reconsideration to obtain additional medical evidence and, if necessary, to secure a vocational expert.

Social Security Disability BenefitsSupplemental Security Income (SSI)Mental ImpairmentDysthymia DisorderPersonality DisorderTreating Physician RuleAdministrative Record DevelopmentMedical-Vocational GuidelinesNonexertional ImpairmentsVocational Expert
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Orrick v. Bestway Trucking, Inc.

David D. Orrick, an employee of Bestway Trucking, Inc., sustained a comminuted fracture to his right eye socket in July 2000 during his employment. He experienced persistent numbness, pain, and swelling, which led to an inability to return to truck driving due to vibration and lifting restrictions. The trial court initially awarded 33% vocational disability based on an 11% impairment rating. The Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel reduced this to 3%. The Supreme Court affirmed the 3% impairment for trigeminal nerve damage but reversed the 8% facial disfigurement impairment. The case was remanded to the trial court to redetermine the vocational disability award, emphasizing the importance of the employee's credible testimony regarding his limitations and economic impact.

Workers' CompensationVocational DisabilityImpairment RatingTrigeminal Nerve DamageFacial FractureTruck Driver InjuryRemandAppellate ReviewCredibility of EmployeeAMA Guides
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Walker v. Saturn Corp.

Sharon Walker, an employee of Saturn Corporation, sought a full court review after a Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel’s decision reduced her disability award. Walker suffered from tenosynovitis in both wrists and ulnar nerve entrapment in her left elbow due to repetitive work, requiring surgeries and leading to permanent restrictions. While medical experts provided anatomical impairment ratings, a vocational specialist assessed a 97% occupational disability given Walker’s limited skills and local job market opportunities. The court reversed the Panel's decision, affirming the trial court's original finding of an eighty-five percent permanent partial disability to both arms, emphasizing that vocational impairment is not solely dependent on anatomical impairment.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityTenosynovitisDe Quervain's SyndromeUlnar Nerve EntrapmentVocational DisabilityAnatomical ImpairmentOccupational DisabilityRepetitive Strain InjurySurgery
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ficken v. Vocational Education & Extension Board of Suffolk

The petitioner sought review of her employment termination as a secretary by the Vocational Education and Extension Board of the County of Suffolk (VEEB) and requested reinstatement with back pay. She argued that she was discharged without the procedural protections afforded to civil servants under Civil Service Law § 75. VEEB contended that the petitioner was not covered by these protections. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing her reinstatement and back pay. The appellate court affirmed this decision, holding that the petitioner's position, though designated 'unclassified' by Suffolk County, did not fit any category under Civil Service Law § 35, thus classifying it as 'classified' and entitling her to § 75 protections. The court emphasized that the petitioner could not be denied these rights until a proper classification was established.

Civil Service LawEmployment TerminationReinstatementBack PayUnclassified ServiceClassified ServiceCivil Servant RightsDue ProcessArticle 78 ProceedingSuffolk County
References
5
Case No. 03-06-00404-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 06, 2007

Johnnie M. Charles v. Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association, on Behalf of Phico Insurance Company, an Impaired Carrier

This case involves a restricted appeal filed by Johnnie M. Charles from a trial court's order dismissing her cause without prejudice. Charles initially appealed a Texas Workers' Compensation Commission decision regarding her impairment rating. After a venue transfer to Travis County, her case was dismissed for failure to pay filing fees. A nunc pro tunc order was later issued to correct a clerical error in the cause number of the original dismissal order. Charles appealed, citing errors in the dismissal, the lack of a court reporter, and the original hearing. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, ruling that Charles's challenges to the original dismissal were untimely and that no error occurred in the nunc pro tunc order, which merely corrected a clerical error without altering the original judgment's substance.

restricted appealdismissal without prejudicenunc pro tunc orderclerical errorwant of prosecutionappellate jurisdictiontimeliness of appealTexas Rules of Civil ProcedureTexas Rules of Appellate Procedureworkers' compensation
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 13, 1996

Hill v. Royal Insurance Co.

The case concerns Plaintiff Hill, who sought workers' compensation benefits from her employer, CKR Industries, for injuries sustained due to chemical exposure at work. The trial court awarded permanent partial disability benefits, finding a vocational disability despite medical testimony indicating no permanent anatomical impairment. The Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel affirmed this decision, holding that permanency can be established through medical evidence of a permanent restriction, even without an AMA Guidelines impairment rating, and that vocational disability is the ultimate issue. The Panel concluded that Hill's inability to work in an environment with respiratory irritants constituted a permanent partial disability under the Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Act.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityVocational DisabilityChemical ExposureWork-Related InjuryMedical Impairment RatingAMA GuidelinesTennessee Workers' Compensation ActAffirmed JudgmentAppeals Panel
References
6
Case No. 03-08-00483-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 19, 2010

Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association for Reliance National Insurance Company, an Impaired Company v. Doris J. Toberny

Doris J. Toberny, an exhibit decorator, injured her back on the job in May 2000, leading to spinal-fusion surgery that also corrected pre-existing scoliosis. Initially, her employer's insurer, Texas Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association for Reliance National Insurance Company ('the Company'), paid for the surgery. However, in December 2001, the Company disputed the claim, asserting the injury was only a lower back strain and not the cause of her scoliosis. After a designated doctor assigned Toberny a 25-percent impairment rating in 2002, the Company paid supplemental income benefits for eight quarters. Three years later, in September 2005, the Company sought to dispute her impairment rating and discontinue benefits, claiming her pre-existing conditions were not compensable. The Division of Workers’ Compensation and the district court found that the Company had waived its right to contest the impairment rating under former rule 130.102(g) due to late dispute filing, and affirmed Toberny's 25-percent impairment rating and entitlement to benefits. The Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the validity of rule 130.102(g) and the finding of waiver, thus confirming Toberny's impairment rating and attorney's fees.

Workers' CompensationImpairment Rating DisputeSupplemental Income BenefitsWaiver DoctrineCompensability of InjuryExtent of InjuryJudicial Review of Agency DecisionTexas Appeals CourtAdministrative Rule ValidityMaximum Medical Improvement
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 21, 2013

Claim of Canales v. Pinnacle Foods Group LLC

Claimant, a 52-year-old production laborer with limited education and English skills, suffered a work-related knee injury in December 2010. Her treating physician initially found a 100% temporary medical impairment, later reducing it to 80% in June and July 2011. Following an independent medical examination in July 2011, the carrier reduced her to a partial disability rate. An orthopedic surgeon determined 100% impairment again in September 2011. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge awarded an 80% temporary disability rate for the 12-week period following the IME and a total temporary disability rate thereafter, which the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed in February 2013. Claimant appealed, arguing the Board erred by not considering vocational factors in determining her compensation rate for temporary disability. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that "loss of wage-earning capacity" and vocational factors apply only to the duration of permanent partial disability benefits, not to the determination of "wage earning capacity" for temporary partial disabilities under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (5-a).

Work-related injuryKnee injuryTemporary disabilityPartial disabilityWage-earning capacityVocational factorsWorkers' Compensation LawStatutory interpretationMedical impairmentIndependent Medical Examination (IME)
References
13
Case No. 2016-03-0413
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 05, 2017

Dodson, Deborah v. LHC Group

Deborah Dodson, an employee of LHC Group, injured her left ankle and right knee in May 2015. She underwent knee surgery and was placed at maximum medical improvement by Dr. Johnson. She later developed small fiber neuropathy, and despite a referral, faced difficulties obtaining a neurologic impairment evaluation. The Court granted Ms. Dodson's request for a neurologic impairment evaluation, either by Dr. Butler or another neurologist, referring Dr. Butler to the Penalty Program for failure to provide an impairment opinion. However, the Court denied her claim for additional temporary total disability benefits, finding she reached MMI on March 23, 2017, when Dr. Butler ceased active treatment.

Workers' CompensationNeurologic Impairment EvaluationTemporary Total Disability BenefitsMaximum Medical ImprovementSmall Fiber NeuropathyPain ManagementExpedited HearingMedical TreatmentImpairment RatingPenalty Program
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 1,845 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