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

Westerhaus v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

Justice Lagarde dissents in a case concerning the readjudication of "future dependency" of a minor under the Workers' Compensation Act. In 1982, Stacie was found dependent, with an insurance company, Liberty, paying benefits until 1993 when it sought readjudication. The trial court's judgment allowed for readjudication based on a "material change of the then circumstances of dependency." Lagarde argues that Liberty's summary judgment evidence, which included Stacie's admissions about her financial independence and age, conclusively proved this material change. Therefore, Justice Lagarde would have affirmed the summary judgment in favor of Liberty.

Future DependencyMinor DependencyWorkers' CompensationReadjudicationMaterial Change of CircumstancesSummary JudgmentDissenting OpinionAdult Child DependencyFinancial IndependenceInsurance Benefits
References
0
Case No. 23-0697
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 28, 2024

State of Texas Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas Texas Medical Board Texas Health and Human Services Commission And Ken Paxton, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General of the State of Texas v. Lazaro Loe, Individually and as Next Friend of Luna Loe, a Minor Mary Moe and Matthew Moe, Individually and as Next Friends of Maeve Moe, a Minor Nora Noe, Individually and as Next Friend of Nathan Noe, a Minor Sarah Soe and Steven Soe, Individually and as Next Friends of Samantha Soe, a Minor Gina Goe, Individually and as Next Friend of Grayson Goe, a Minor Pflag, Inc. Richard Ogden Roberts III, M.D. David L. Paul, M.D. Patrick W. O'malley, M.D. And American Association of Physicians for Human

The Supreme Court of Texas reversed and vacated a temporary injunction against Senate Bill 14, which prohibits certain medical treatments for minors related to gender transition. Parents of children with gender dysphoria, along with physicians and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, had challenged the law as unconstitutional, alleging infringements on parental rights, occupational freedom for physicians, and discrimination based on sex and transgender status. The Court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to establish a probable right to relief, asserting that parental rights are not absolute and the Legislature has constitutional authority to regulate medicine, especially regarding novel treatments for new conditions. The Court also found no unconstitutional discrimination, stating the law treats males and females equally in its prohibitions and that "transgender status" is not a protected class under the Texas Constitution.

Parental RightsMedical RegulationGender DysphoriaConstitutional LawDue Course of LawEqual ProtectionTransgender RightsMinors' Medical TreatmentLegislative AuthorityTexas Supreme Court
References
62
Case No. 06-01-00034-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 2002

Terry Allen and Wife, Brenda Allen, Individually and A/N/F Matthew Allen, a Minor, Timothy Allen, a Minor and Jennifer Allen, a Minor v. a & T Transportation Company, Inc.

Terry Allen, a truck driver, sustained injuries when his partially-loaded tanker truck overturned. He and his wife, individually and as next friends for their minor children, sued his employer, A & T Transportation Company, Inc., alleging that the company failed to warn or train him about the unique handling characteristics of a partially-loaded tanker. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of A & T. On appeal, the Allens argued that the trial court erred because A & T had a mandatory and nondelegable duty to warn employees of hazards and provide a safe workplace. The appellate court found no legal authority supporting a duty for an employer to train an experienced individual in their chosen trade. The court concluded that the employer had no duty to instruct Terry Allen, thereby negating a necessary element of the Allens' negligence claim. Consequently, the summary judgment was affirmed.

Summary JudgmentAppellate ReviewEmployer DutyNegligence ClaimTruck Driver InjuryTanker Truck AccidentPartial Load HazardDuty to WarnDuty to TrainExperienced Employee
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Person v. Safeco Insurance Co.

This case involves an appeal concerning death benefits under the Worker's Compensation Act following the death of employee Cornelia Skinner Person. The deceased, an office employee for Piper's Exxon Distributing Company, was killed when a pickup truck intentionally driven by Charles Wilson, with passenger Cora Diane Jamerson, crashed into her office. The trial court initially found that the death arose out of and in the course of her employment and that the minor plaintiffs were partial dependents entitled to benefits. The defendant appealed these findings, arguing against the compensability of the death and the dependency status of the minor plaintiffs. The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the assault and death had a rational causal connection to the employee's work and that the minor plaintiffs were indeed partial dependents.

Worker's CompensationDeath BenefitsEmployment AccidentDependentsPartial DependentsAssault During EmploymentCausal ConnectionAppellate ReviewTennessee LawTrial Court Affirmation
References
3
Case No. 14-18-01059-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2021

Rose A. Munguia, as Next Friend of E.S.U., a Minor and J.M.U., a Minor v. Justrod, Inc.

In this appeal, Rose A. Munguia, as next friend of minor children E.S.U. and J.M.U., challenges the trial court’s grant of summary judgment favoring Justrod, Inc. in a wrongful death action. Jose Ucles, the deceased, was working for Justrod as a framer when he fell to his death. Ucles was covered by worker’s compensation insurance. Munguia filed a lawsuit alleging wrongful death and gross negligence. Justrod filed both a no-evidence motion for summary judgment and a traditional motion for summary judgment, which were granted by the trial court. The appellate court affirmed the judgment because Munguia failed to challenge all the grounds on which the summary judgment could have been based.

Summary JudgmentWrongful DeathGross NegligenceWorker's Compensation ActExclusive RemedyAppellate ProcedureChallenge All GroundsNo-Evidence Summary JudgmentTraditional Summary JudgmentFramer Accident
References
13
Case No. 03-22-00126-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2024

Greg Abbott in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Texas, Stephanie Muth in Her Official Capacity of Commissioner of the Department of Family and Protective Services, and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services v. Jane Doe, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Mary Doe, a Minor John Doe, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of Mary Doe, a Minor And Dr. Megan Mooney

This case involves an appeal concerning a temporary injunction against the State of Texas for issuing a directive that classifies gender-affirming medical care for minors as child abuse. Appellees, including parents of a transgender adolescent and a psychologist, sued to enjoin the State from initiating child abuse investigations based on this directive. The trial court denied the State's plea to the jurisdiction and granted a temporary injunction. The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of jurisdiction and the injunction against the Department of Family and Protective Services and its Commissioner, concluding that the directive constituted an invalid rule under the APA and caused irreparable harm. However, it reversed the denial of jurisdiction and dismissed claims against the Governor, stating he lacked authority to control investigatory decisions.

Gender-affirming careChild abuse policyTemporary injunctionAdministrative Procedure ActUltra viresParental rightsEqual protectionDue processState government authorityJudicial review
References
62
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Minor v. Commercial Insurance Co. of Newark

Robert T. Minor filed a worker's compensation suit against Harrison and Walker Construction Company, alleging total and permanent disability due to an injury sustained during employment. The jury found that Minor did not sustain an injury on the alleged date, leading to a take-nothing judgment. Minor appealed, challenging the exclusion of notations from Dr. Thomas Glover's record regarding his low back pain and its origin from construction work. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the exclusion of 'Low back pain' harmless and the notation about the injury's origin inadmissible under the circumstances, and that the appellant failed to re-offer the evidence when it became admissible as rebuttal.

Worker's CompensationHearsay RuleMedical Records AdmissibilityEvidence ExclusionReversible ErrorCumulative EvidenceExpert OpinionSelf-Serving DeclarationsRebuttal EvidenceAppellate Review
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 14, 1998

Claim of Ellis v. Cyclone Coasters Inc.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision concerning a claimant's entitlement to death benefits after her son's work-related death. The Board initially established claimant's dependency but requested further documentation. After reviewing the submitted evidence, including income and expense statements, the Board concluded that the claimant was indeed dependent on her son. The employer appealed this finding, arguing discrepancies in the claimant's financial disclosures. However, the appellate court found that despite minor inconsistencies, the record provided a rational basis for the Board's conclusion of dependency, and therefore, affirmed the Board's decision.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsDependencySubstantial EvidenceFactual FindingAppellate ReviewFinancial DisclosureIncome and ExpensesFamily SupportBoard Decision
References
2
Case No. ADJ2706793 [SFO 0468588]
Regular
Nov 16, 2009

GUADALUPE RAMIREZ (DECEASED); and KATHRYN YOLKEN (Guardian ad Litem for minor dependents), JUAN JENOVEBO GARCIA (DECEASED); and KATHRYN YOLKEN (Guardian ad Litem for minor dependents), RAFAEL TAPIA, JR., minor; and KATHRYN YOLKEN (Guardian ad Litem), ROLANDO TAPIA (DECEASED); and KATHRYN YOLKEN (Guardian ad Litem for dependent minors) vs. ARGUS NEWSPAPER/ANG NEWSPAPERS; and LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The WCAB rescinds its July 1, 2008 Findings of Fact and Order, and returns the case to the trial level for review and potential approval of the parties' proposed settlements.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDGuadalupe RamirezJuan Jeno'vebo GarciaRafael Tapia Jr.Rolando TapiaGuardian ad LitemArgus NewspaperLiberty Mutual Insurance CompanyCompromise and ReleaseFindings of Fact and Order
References
0
Case No. 03-05-00309-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 12, 2006

TPCIGA, for Reliance National Indemnity Company v. Magdalena Ford Morrison A/N/F of Eric Ford

This case addresses the duration of workers' compensation death benefits for a deceased employee's minor, dependent stepchild in Texas. TPCIGA, representing Reliance National Indemnity Company, argued that benefits for Eric Ford should be limited to 364 weeks due to his dependent status. Magdalena Ford Morrison, on behalf of Eric, contended that as a minor, Eric was entitled to benefits until age 18, or up to age 25 if enrolled as a full-time student, under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act. The Texas Workers' Compensation Commission initially limited benefits, but the Travis County court reversed this, granting summary judgment for Morrison. The appellate court affirmed, interpreting the Act's sections 408.182 and 408.183 to mean a minor child's eligibility for benefits is based on minority, not solely dependency, entitling Eric to benefits until age 18 or 25 under student provisions.

Death BenefitsMinor DependencyStepchild EligibilityBenefit DurationStatutory InterpretationTexas Labor Code §408.183Appellate ReviewSummary Judgment RulingAdministrative LawTexas Courts of Appeals
References
32
Showing 1-10 of 976 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