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. 13-03-427-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 23, 2006

Columbia Rio Grande Regional Healthcare, L.P. D/B/A Rio Grande Regional Hospital v. Alice H. Hawley and James A. Hawley

This case involves an appeal by Columbia Rio Grande Regional Healthcare, L.P., d/b/a Rio Grande Regional Hospital, from a jury verdict in favor of Alice H. Hawley and James A. Hawley. The Hawleys sued the Hospital for negligence in failing to timely communicate Alice H. Hawley's colon cancer diagnosis, which led to a significant delay in treatment and the cancer becoming inoperable. The central issue revolved around the sufficiency of evidence regarding causation, specifically whether Mrs. Hawley had a greater than 50% chance of survival at the time of the Hospital's alleged negligence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, overruling all of the Hospital's ten issues on appeal, which included challenges to evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and damages.

Medical MalpracticeHospital NegligenceCancer MisdiagnosisColon CancerLoss of Chance DoctrineProximate CauseExpert Testimony AdmissibilitySufficiency of Medical EvidenceJury Charge ErrorDamage Caps
References
63
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ley v. Rochester Regional Joint Board, Local 14A

Rhonda P. Ley, Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board, filed a petition against the Rochester Regional Joint Board, Local 14A (Union) seeking a preliminary injunction. Ley alleged that Article XXII of the collective bargaining agreement between the Union and Xerox Corporation (Employer) constituted an unlawful 'union signatory' agreement under Section 8(e) of the National Labor Relations Act. Furthermore, Ley claimed that the Union's continued attempts to enforce Article XXII violated Sections 8(b)(4)(ii)(A) and (B) of the Act. The Union argued that Article XXII was a lawful work preservation provision. The Court found reasonable cause to believe the Union was violating the Act and that a preliminary injunction was just and proper to prevent further statutory violations and maintain public interest. Consequently, the preliminary injunction was granted, enjoining the Union from enforcing Article XXII.

Labor LawPreliminary InjunctionUnfair Labor PracticeNational Labor Relations ActUnion Signatory AgreementWork PreservationCollective Bargaining AgreementSubcontractingArbitrationDistrict Court
References
11
Case No. 08-2192
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 09, 2010

In Re Regions Morgan Keegan Erisa Litigation

Plaintiffs, current or former employee participants in Regions sponsored 401(k) retirement plans, filed a class action lawsuit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) against various fiduciaries and parties in interest, including Regions Financial Corporation, Regions Bank, Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc., and Morgan Asset Management, Inc. The Complaint alleged that the Plans suffered losses due to imprudent investments in Regions' company stock, high-risk Bond Funds, and excessive fees charged by RMK Select Funds, facilitated by self-dealing and revenue sharing. Defendants filed motions to dismiss, asserting various defenses including exemptions under ERISA, lack of fiduciary status for some individuals, and the applicability of ERISA § 404(c). The court largely denied the motions to dismiss, finding that Plaintiffs had sufficiently pled facts for most claims to proceed, but granted the motion to dismiss Count V against Morgan Keegan and MAM.

ERISA401(k) PlanFiduciary DutyMotion to DismissClass ActionInvestment ManagementExcessive FeesProhibited TransactionCompany StockBond Funds
References
42
Case No. 13-08-00542-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 30, 2010

Rio Grande Regional Hospital, Inc. and Columbia Rio Grande Healthcare, L.P. D/B/A Rio Grande Regional Hospital v. Diana Lopez Villarreal, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Hermes Villarreal, and as Next Friend of Sarah Villarreal, Lauren Villarreal, and Hermes Alejandro Villarreal, Minors, and Hermelinda Villarreal, Indvidually

This appeal stems from a wrongful death and survival action based on a health care liability claim against Rio Grande Regional Hospital for the suicide of Hermes Villarreal while under their care. The jury concluded the hospital was 75% responsible, and the trial court awarded damages, applying statutory caps. Appellants (hospital) argued lack of evidence for foreseeability and causation, and that Hermes's suicide was an intervening cause. Appellees (Villarreal family) cross-appealed regarding Hermes's proportionate responsibility and the application of damage caps. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict on causation and foreseeability, and that the suicide was not a superseding cause. The court also held that both sections 74.301(b) and 74.303 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code should be applied for damage caps.

Medical MalpracticeWrongful DeathSuicideHospital NegligenceForeseeabilityCausationIntervening CauseSuperseding CauseDamage CapsComparative Negligence
References
79
Case No. 13-06-00569-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2008

Canyon Regional Water Authority v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, and Margaret Hoffman in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

This case involves an appeal by Canyon Regional Water Authority (Canyon Regional) regarding water rates charged by Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (Guadalupe-Blanco) and the administrative rules of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (the Commission). Canyon Regional challenged Guadalupe-Blanco's rate increases, arguing they were not

Water Rate AppealContractual InterpretationAdministrative LawDeclaratory ReliefAttorney's FeesSummary JudgmentPublic Interest HearingTexas Commission on Environmental QualityGuadalupe-Blanco River AuthorityCanyon Regional Water Authority
References
14
Case No. 02-23-00220-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2025

Bianco Brain and Spine, PLLC and Nikhil Kanti Patel, M.D. v. Larry Jones and Shelley Jones

This case concerns a medical malpractice claim brought by Larry and Shelley Jones against Bianco Brain and Spine, PLLC and Dr. Nikhil Kanti Patel. Mr. Jones suffered a cauda equina injury during spine surgery performed by Dr. Patel. The jury found Dr. Patel negligent, and his negligence proximately caused Mr. Jones's injury. On appeal, Dr. Patel challenged the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence. The Court affirmed the judgment against Dr. Patel, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that Dr. Patel's intraoperative surgical technique (removing existing hardware before stabilizing the L3-L4 junction) breached the standard of care and caused the injury. Bianco Brain and Spine, PLLC was sued under a theory of respondeat superior. The Court reversed the judgment imposing liability on Bianco, holding that the Joneses waived their independent ground of recovery for respondeat superior by failing to submit a jury question on this claim, and the evidence of Dr. Patel's employment status was not conclusive.

Medical MalpracticeMedical NegligenceSpine SurgeryCauda Equina InjuryRespondeat SuperiorVicarious LiabilityLegal SufficiencyFactual SufficiencyExpert TestimonyProximate Cause
References
87
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Thomann v. Lakes Regional MHMR Center

Susan Lorraine Thomann appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Lakes Regional MHMR Center, dismissing her claims of employment discrimination and retaliation. Thomann, a house parent, was terminated after undergoing knee and back surgeries that resulted in a permanent lifting restriction, preventing her from performing essential job functions. She alleged discrimination based on disability and retaliation for an internal complaint. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, concluding that Thomann failed to produce sufficient evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact that she was disabled under the Texas Labor Code or that her termination was retaliatory. The court noted that Lakes Regional had offered her an alternative receptionist position, which she declined.

Employment DiscriminationRetaliationDisability DiscriminationSummary JudgmentTexas Labor CodeLifting RestrictionsReasonable AccommodationEssential Job FunctionsMajor Life ActivityRecord of Disability
References
51
Case No. 01-15-00374-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 27, 2015

the Upper Trinity Regional Water District and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality v. National Wildlife Federation

This case involves an appeal filed by the National Wildlife Federation (Appellee) against the Upper Trinity Regional Water District and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (Appellants). The appeal concerns the District Court's judgment of March 6, 2015, which reversed and remanded TCEQ's decision to grant Water Use Permit No. 5821 to the Upper Trinity Regional Water District. The core issue is TCEQ's alleged failure to properly implement Texas Water Code Section 11.085 (l)(2), which requires stringent water conservation and efficiency for interbasin water transfers. The Appellee argues that TCEQ improperly relied on a voluntary guide (Report 362) instead of fulfilling legislative directives for robust conservation standards, and that the District's water conservation plan lacks adequate implementation and enforcement mechanisms, thus failing to meet the 'highest practicable levels of water conservation and efficiency achievable' as mandated by law.

Water ConservationInterbasin TransferEnvironmental LawAdministrative LawAppellate ReviewTexas Water CodeWater Use PermitDrought Contingency PlanRegulatory ComplianceBest Management Practices
References
25
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 00599 [224 AD3d 428]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 06, 2024

Matter of New Millennium Pain & Spine Medicine, P.C. v. Garrison Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.

This case involves two appeals by New Millennium Pain & Spine Medicine, P.C. against Garrison Property & Casualty Insurance Company and GEICO Casualty Company. New Millennium sought to vacate master arbitration awards that denied its claims for no-fault benefits for medical services. The Supreme Court denied these applications. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's decisions, stating that an arbitrator's award will not be set aside unless it is irrational. The court also addressed the argument regarding a 20% wage offset in no-fault benefits, finding it unavailing under Insurance Law § 5102 (b). Ultimately, New Millennium was not entitled to attorneys' fees as it was not the prevailing party.

No-fault benefitsarbitration awardvacaturinsurance lawwage offsetappellate reviewmedical servicesno-fault policy exhaustionattorneys' feesCPLR Article 75
References
8
Case No. 13-06-00353-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 2009

in Re: Rio Grande Regional Hospital

Rio Grande Regional Hospital sought a writ of mandamus to compel arbitration in a negligence suit brought by its former employee, Norma Gonzalez. Gonzalez, a housekeeper, was injured on the job and sued Rio Grande, a non-subscriber to workers' compensation. Rio Grande argued a signed 'Election to Participate' in an Employee Health and Safety Plan, which included an arbitration clause, bound Gonzalez. However, Gonzalez contended the agreement lacked consideration because she was ineligible for the plan's benefits as a 'PRN' employee and was denied coverage upon injury. The Court of Appeals, Thirteenth District of Texas, denied the writ, affirming the trial court's decision. The appellate court ruled that Rio Grande's promise of benefits was illusory, rendering the arbitration agreement unenforceable due to a lack of consideration.

ArbitrationContract LawEmployment ArbitrationLack of ConsiderationIllusory ContractWrit of MandamusTexas Civil ProcedureFederal Arbitration ActWorkers' Compensation Non-subscriberAppellate Review
References
46
Showing 1-10 of 783 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