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. Cause No. 12-92-00401-CV; Cause No. 12-92-00400-CV; Cause No. 12-92-00386-CV
Regular Panel Decision

White v. Blake

The Relator, James Ronnie White, filed three original mandamus proceedings against Judge Blake concerning child custody and parental rights over his daughter, K_B_W_. The case originated from a 1983 Alabama divorce, with subsequent modifications and allegations of child abuse that Alabama courts found groundless. After the child's mother moved K_B_W_ to Texas, White challenged a Texas protective order, the denial of his habeas corpus application for possession of the child, and the refusal to dismiss a petition to terminate his parental rights. The appellate court denied mandamus relief for the protective order and the denial of habeas corpus (due to lack of record on emergency grounds) but conditionally granted relief regarding attorney's fees awarded in the habeas matter. Crucially, the court conditionally granted mandamus relief to dismiss the termination petition, holding that the Texas court abused its discretion by not adhering to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) and Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA) requirements for deferring jurisdiction to Alabama, which continued to exercise jurisdiction.

MandamusChild CustodyParental Rights TerminationJurisdiction DisputeUCCJAPKPAInterstate CustodyHabeas CorpusProtective OrderAttorney Fees
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Logan Group, Inc.

This case involves an order from District Judge Mahon dismissing the claims of Intervenor Fidelity Funding (NC), Inc. due to a lack of federal jurisdiction. MCI Telecommunications Corporation originally sued The Logan Group, Inc. and Communication Specialties, Inc. (CSI) for unpaid telephone services. Fidelity intervened, alleging MCI failed to pay accounts receivable assigned by CSI and asserted claims of fraud and breach of contract. The Court determined that Fidelity was an intervening plaintiff, not an intervening defendant, and its claims were independent of the main action. Consequently, the court found no supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(b), as the original jurisdiction was based solely on diversity, leading to the dismissal of Fidelity's claims without prejudice.

JurisdictionSupplemental JurisdictionDiversity JurisdictionInterventionRule 24(a)Intervening PlaintiffFederal CourtDismissalClaimsAccounts Receivable
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Suzy Phillips Originals, Inc. v. Coville, Inc.

This case involves a dispute over defective fabric supplied by defendant Coville, Inc., a textile converter, to plaintiff Suzy Phillips Originals, Inc., a garment manufacturer. Suzy Phillips filed claims for breach of contract, negligence, and misrepresentation. Coville moved for summary judgment to dismiss these claims. The Court granted summary judgment for Coville on the breach of contract claim for lost profits (Second Cause of Action) and the misrepresentation claim (Fourth Cause of Action). Suzy Phillips voluntarily withdrew its negligence claim (Third Cause of Action). The Court denied Coville's motion to remand the case to state court, exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining First Cause of Action for breach of contract, which seeks damages for the cost of goods sold. The Court also denied motions for sanctions and attorneys' fees.

Contract DisputeSummary JudgmentNegligenceMisrepresentationBreach of ContractUniform Commercial CodeSale of GoodsTextile IndustryDamage LimitationLost Profits
References
37
Case No. 04-19-00860-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 11, 2020

in Re Vilore Foods Company, Inc.

In this original mandamus proceeding, Relator Vilore Foods Company, Inc. challenged the trial court's denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. Vilore Foods argued that Catalina Castillo, the real party in interest, failed to exhaust her administrative remedies concerning a workplace injury claim, thus depriving the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas, agreed with Vilore Foods, finding that Castillo did not pursue her workers' compensation claim through the Division of Workers’ Compensation after her benefits were denied by the carrier. Instead, she filed a lawsuit alleging negligence, negligent supervision, and misrepresentation. The appellate court held that the Workers’ Compensation Act vests exclusive jurisdiction in the Workers’ Compensation Division, requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before a trial court can assume jurisdiction. Consequently, the court conditionally granted the petition for writ of mandamus, ordering the trial court to vacate its prior order and dismiss Castillo's cause for lack of jurisdiction.

Workers' CompensationMandamusJurisdictionAdministrative RemediesPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Court of AppealsEmployer LiabilityEmployee InjuryNegligenceExclusive Jurisdiction
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Accident Fund Gen. Ins. Co.

Ricky Sayaz, an injured employee, sued his employer, Coil Tubing Solutions, LLC, for wrongful discharge and retaliation, and also sued his workers' compensation carrier, Accident Fund General Insurance Company, and its adjuster, Kriste Henderson, for aiding and abetting, tortious interference, and conspiracy, alleging misuse of the "bona fide offer of employment" process to justify his termination. Accident Fund and Henderson sought a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting that the Division of Workers' Compensation held exclusive jurisdiction. The trial court denied this plea, leading to this original proceeding. The higher court determined that Sayaz's claims against Accident Fund and Henderson arise from the statutory claims-handling process and fall under the Division's exclusive jurisdiction. Consequently, the court conditionally granted mandamus relief to Accident Fund and Henderson, directing the trial court to dismiss claims against them for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, while denying mandamus relief to Coil Tubing Solutions, LLC.

Workers' CompensationExclusive JurisdictionMandamus ReliefBona Fide Offer of EmploymentRetaliatory DischargeTortious InterferenceConspiracyClaims HandlingAdministrative RemediesSubject-Matter Jurisdiction
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ortiz v. Insurance Co. of State of Pennsylvania

Carlos Ortiz appealed the dismissal of his case by the 205th District Court of El Paso County for lack of jurisdiction. The trial court's decision stemmed from Ortiz's alleged failure to timely file his original petition with the Texas Worker’s Compensation Commission, as mandated by Tex.Lab.Code Ann. § 410.253. Ortiz contended that Tex.R.Civ.P. 5, the "mailbox rule," applied, validating his July 15, 1996 mailing date despite the Commission's later receipt. The appellate court, citing precedent from Albertson’s, Inc. v. Sinclair, determined that while compliance with Section 410.253 is mandatory, it is not jurisdictional. Consequently, the court concluded that the late filing did not strip the trial court of jurisdiction, rendering the dismissal an abuse of discretion. The order of dismissal was therefore reversed, and the case remanded for further proceedings.

TexasWorker's CompensationJurisdictionMailbox RuleStatutory InterpretationTimely FilingAppealDismissalRemandTexas Labor Code
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McFadin v. Broadway Coffeehouse, LLC

This case involves a second appeal concerning a supersedeas bond. Lee Nick McFadin, III, appealed an order requiring him and his surety to pay the full amount of a supersedeas bond to Broadway Coffeehouse, LLC and the Saks Children Trust after his initial appeal was unsuccessful. The court of appeals dismissed McFadin's appeal, concluding it lacked jurisdiction because the payment order was not a final order. The Supreme Court of Texas disagreed, holding that the trial court's order requiring payment of the bond amount went beyond the original 2014 judgment by imposing new monetary obligations on McFadin. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded that the order was a final, appealable order and that the court of appeals had jurisdiction to consider the merits of McFadin's appeal. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Appellate JurisdictionFinal JudgmentSupersedeas BondPost-Judgment OrdersRemandDeclaratory JudgmentPartition of PropertyDue ProcessMandamusTrial Court Jurisdiction
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

E.S. Originals Inc. v. Totes Isotoner Corp.

This is a diversity action concerning breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and indemnification between E.S. Originals Inc. (ESO) and Totes Isotoner Corp. (Totes). ESO alleges Totes failed to provide access to financial records to verify earn-out payments as stipulated in an Asset Purchase Agreement, preventing ESO from fully disputing Totes's Net Sales Statement. Totes moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, to compel arbitration, and alternatively, to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The court denied Totes's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding factual disputes inappropriate for dismissal. Crucially, the court granted Totes's motion to compel arbitration, determining that ESO's claims, which primarily concern accounting issues and earn-out payment calculations, fall within the narrow arbitration clause of the Agreement, requiring resolution by an Independent Accounting Firm. Consequently, Totes's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was denied as moot.

ArbitrationContract DisputeEarn-out PaymentsAsset Purchase AgreementSubject Matter JurisdictionRule 12(b)(6)Federal Arbitration ActAccounting IssuesBreach of ContractGood Faith and Fair Dealing
References
30
Case No. 15-25-00142-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 08, 2025

In Re Robert Edward Battaile v. the State of Texas

Relator Robert Edward Battaile filed an Original Petition for Writ of Mandamus to compel the Attorney General and Secretary of State of Texas to investigate and oversee a new election for the 2024 Manor City Council and Mayoral contest. Battaile alleges election fraud, civil rights violations, historic site desecration, land misappropriation, and denial of municipal services. The petition seeks extraordinary relief due to alleged ongoing delays, bias, and incapacity of the underlying 459th District Court, requesting the 15th Court of Appeals to exercise original jurisdiction, appoint special masters, and order various injunctions and remedies.

election fraudmandamuscivil rightshistoric preservationland misappropriationmunicipal servicespublic trust doctrinespecial masterTexas Constitutionappellate review
References
22
Case No. 12-0257
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 07, 2013

Benny P. Phillips, M.D. v. Dale Bramlett, Individually and as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Vicki Bramlett, Shane Fuller and Michael Fuller

The Supreme Court of Texas reviewed a health care liability case involving Dr. Benny P. Phillips and the Bramlett family, addressing jurisdictional and procedural issues post-appeal. Key points included the court of appeals' jurisdiction over a remand judgment, the proper calculation of postjudgment interest, and the trial court's action of vacating an original judgment. The Court affirmed the court of appeals' jurisdiction and ruled that postjudgment interest must accrue from the date of the original judgment when no new evidence is required on remand. While the vacating of the original judgment was deemed unnecessary, it was not considered reversible error. The case was remanded for the trial court to modify its judgment in line with the ruling on postjudgment interest.

JurisdictionPostjudgment InterestRemandAppellate ReviewDamages CapStowers DoctrineHealth Care LiabilityProcedural LawTexas Supreme CourtStatutory Interpretation
References
37
Showing 1-10 of 8,231 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