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. 14-03-00626-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 17, 2004

Kevin Lewis v. Randall's Food & Drug, L.P.

Kevin Lewis, an employee of Randalls, sued his employer for personal injury after injuring his back while lifting heavy boxes. Lewis, who was on modified work duty, claimed Randalls breached its duty of care by failing to observe federal lifting standards, requiring heavy lifting while he was on modified duty, and failing to provide an adequate workforce. The trial court granted Randalls' motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the court reviewed the summary judgment as a no-evidence motion and affirmed the trial court's decision, finding Lewis failed to present sufficient evidence of breach of duty or proximate causation for his claims. The expert testimony provided was deemed conclusory, and lay testimony was insufficient to establish causation due to the nature and timing of the alleged negligence and injury.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentNegligenceCausationExpert TestimonyNo-Evidence MotionModified Work DutyLifting InjuryWorkplace SafetyTexas Court of Appeals
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Jones v. Red Arrow Heavy Hauling, Inc.

Martha Rae Jones, representing herself and the estate of James Clay Jones, Jr., appealed a judgment in favor of Red Arrow Heavy Hauling, Inc. James Clay Jones, Jr., a truck driver for Red Arrow, died in an accident. Jones alleged Red Arrow breached a contract by failing to obtain workers' compensation coverage despite deductions from his pay, violated the DTPA, and was negligent. The jury initially sided with Red Arrow. The appellate court reviewed the admission of evidence concerning Jones' $72,000 settlement with Protective Insurance Company, an insurer not privy to the contract with Red Arrow. The court found this evidence irrelevant and prejudicial, leading to the reversal and remand of the trial court's judgment for a new trial.

Workers' CompensationBreach of ContractCollateral Source RuleDeceptive Trade Practices ActDTPANegligenceProducts LiabilityEvidence AdmissibilityPrejudicial ErrorSettlement
References
11
Case No. 03-95-00327-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 22, 1996

Crawford Heavy and Marine Construction Limited v. Texas Department of Transportation

Crawford Heavy and Marine Construction Limited (Crawford) appealed a district court's order that affirmed a decision by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). The dispute arose from a contract for concrete repair on IH-10, where Crawford claimed TxDOT breached the contract regarding repair sites, cement type, traffic control, and delays, seeking over $476,086.00 in damages. An administrative law judge initially recommended a recovery for Crawford, but TxDOT's executive director reduced the award. Crawford then sought judicial review, claiming errors of fact and law and deprivation of property without due process. The appellate court found the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because no specific statute granted jurisdiction for review of TxDOT orders under the Administrative Procedure Act, and Crawford did not demonstrate a vested property right to support a due process claim. Consequently, the appellate court vacated the trial court's order and dismissed the cause for want of jurisdiction.

JurisdictionAppellate ProcedureAdministrative LawContract DisputeGovernmental ImmunityDue ProcessVested RightsSubject Matter JurisdictionJudicial ReviewTexas Court of Appeals
References
28
Case No. 09-19-00309-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 29, 2021

BAM Heavy Equipment and Repair, LLC and Bert T. Johnson v. Michael E. Jackson

Michael E. Jackson sued BAM Heavy Equipment and Repair, LLC and Bert T. Johnson for breach of contract regarding unpaid 'dividends' from an amended operating agreement. A jury found in Jackson's favor and awarded him $117,318. BAM appealed, raising issues concerning Jackson's membership status in the LLC, the sufficiency of evidence for damages, and alleged jury charge errors related to ratification and an unspecified agreement. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the damages award and no abuse of discretion in the jury charge or the admission of evidence.

Breach of ContractLLC MembershipJury VerdictDamages AwardLegal SufficiencyFactual SufficiencyJury InstructionsRatificationImplied RatificationCasteel Error
References
31
Case No. ADJ1834869
Regular
Feb 10, 2014

GREGORY CLEVELAND vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration regarding permanent disability (PD) awarded to the applicant. The Board adopted the findings of the administrative law judge, noting the defendant's failure to cross-examine the rater on the calculation of PD, which included instructions to consider overlap of heavy lifting. Furthermore, the Board admonished the defendant for attaching documents to its petition in violation of board rules. The applicant was awarded PD based on restrictions from heavy lifting for his cervical spine and right shoulder.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDCITY OF LOS ANGELESPERMISSIBLY SELF-INSUREDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONDENIEDRATING INSTRUCTIONSOVERLAPVERY HEAVY LIFTINGAPPORTIONMENTLABOR CODE §4664
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wilson v. Lindamood Farms, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from a summary judgment granted in favor of the defendant employer. The plaintiff, a farm worker, claimed a back injury sustained while lifting heavy equipment, alleging the foreman instructed him to perform the task in a dangerous manner. The court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding that even if the foreman gave the alleged instruction, the plaintiff, having prior knowledge of the heavy lifting and the inherent risks, assumed the risk of injury. The decision highlights the principle that an employer's duty of ordinary care is fulfilled by providing a reasonably safe workplace and tools, and that employees are presumed to understand and assume the ordinary risks of their occupation.

Summary JudgmentAssumption of RiskCommon Law NegligenceEmployer LiabilityWorkplace InjuryFarm AccidentAppellate ReviewTennessee LawDuty of CareSafe Workplace
References
8
Case No. 2021-06-0071, State File No. 80044-2021
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 08, 2022

Martinez, Marcus Sosa v. Halloran Investment Properties, LLC

Mr. Sosa Martinez sought medical treatment, reimbursement for past medical expenses, and temporary disability benefits for a severe spine infection and right-wrist fracture, alleging they stemmed from lifting heavy rocks at a Halloran jobsite. Halloran Investment Properties, LLC, denied employer status and contested the work-relatedness of the injuries. The Court found Mr. Sosa Martinez unlikely to prove an employment relationship with Halloran or that his injuries were work-related, especially given medical evidence suggesting a spontaneous infection not linked to heavy lifting. Consequently, the Court denied Mr. Sosa Martinez's requested relief.

Expedited HearingEmployment Status DisputeIndependent ContractorMedical CausationSpinal InfectionWrist FractureWorkers' Compensation ClaimsTemporary DisabilityMedical Expense ReimbursementTennessee Law
References
2
Case No. No. 08-22-00029-CV (TC# 2021DCV1132)
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 27, 2023

Ricardo A. Samaniego, in His Official Capacity as County Judge, Carlos Leon, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, David Stout, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Illiana Holguin, in Her Official Capacity as County Commissioner, Carl L. Robinson, in His Official Capacity as County Commissioner v. Associated General Contractors of Texas, Highway, Heavy, Utilities & Industrial Branch and a Brothers Milling, LLC

The El Paso County Commissioners Court, including County Judge Ricardo A. Samaniego and Commissioners, appealed the denial of their plea to the jurisdiction. They were sued by Associated General Contractors of Texas and A Brothers Milling, LLC, who alleged the Commissioners Court acted ultra vires in setting prevailing wage rates for heavy-highway construction projects in El Paso County. The Appellants argued governmental immunity shielded them and that their wage determinations were final. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, concluding that the Appellees had sufficiently pleaded an ultra vires claim, which falls within the trial court's subject-matter jurisdiction. The court clarified that ultra vires acts by public officials are not considered acts of the state and therefore are not subject to the finality clause.

Governmental ImmunityUltra Vires ActPrevailing Wage RatePublic WorksSubject Matter JurisdictionInterlocutory AppealPlea to the JurisdictionTexas Government CodeStatutory InterpretationEl Paso County
References
16
Case No. ADJ2863902
Regular
Jul 21, 2009

KENNETH MOORE vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding of 20 percent permanent disability for a corrections officer's hernia injury. The defendant argued that the AMA Guides warranted zero percent impairment, but the Board found the agreed medical examiner's report constituted substantial evidence. The examiner determined the applicant met criteria for class II impairment based on frequent discomfort precluding heavy lifting, even with surgical mesh obscuring a palpable defect. The Board deferred to the medical expert's opinion, affirming the prior award.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityAMA GuidesAgreed Medical EvaluatorHerniaClass II ImpairmentCrohn's DiseaseApportionment
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Engelman v. Girl Scouts-Indian Hills Council, Inc.

Plaintiff, a long-term employee, was terminated by the Girl Scouts-Indian Hills Council, Inc. and its executive director, Denise Newvine, after sustaining a permanent partial disability. Prior to termination, his job description was altered to include heavy lifting, and his assistant's hours were reduced. Plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging disability discrimination, and later applied for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits. The defendants' motion for summary judgment was partially denied by the Supreme Court, allowing the disability discrimination claim to proceed. The appellate court affirmed this denial, ruling that plaintiff presented a prima facie case of discrimination. The court highlighted outstanding questions of fact regarding reasonable accommodations and the consistency of plaintiff's SSDI application with his ability to perform job duties, precluding summary judgment.

Disability DiscriminationSummary JudgmentAppealHuman Rights LawAmericans with Disabilities ActReasonable AccommodationSocial Security Disability InsuranceEmployment TerminationPrima Facie CaseBroome County
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 2,029 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