Texas State Courts
Texas Federal Courts
Division of Workers Compensation
State Office of Administrative Hearings
Title 6. Public Officers and Employees
Subtitle A. Provisions Generally Applicable to Public Officers and Employees
Title 10. General Government
Subtitle A. Administrative Procedure and Practice
Title 8. Health Insurance and Other Health Coverages
Subtitle D. Provider Plans
Title 14. Utilization Review and Independent Review
Title 2. Protection of Laborers
Subtitle E. Regulation of Certain Occupations
Title 5. Workers’ Compensation
Part 7. State Office of Administrative Hearings
Part 1. Texas Department of Insurance
Chapter 19. Agents Licensing
Part 2. Texas Department of Insurance Division of Workers Compensation
(Claims Before Jan. 1, 1991)
(Claims On or After Jan. 1, 1991)
Part 3. Texas Certified Self-Insurer Guaranty Association
Part 4. State Office of Risk Management
Part 6. Office of Injured Employee Counsel
Calculators
Medical Lookup
Support
Quick Links
Cases & Decisions
Statutes & Rules
Cases & Decisions
Administrative Decisions
Division of Workers Compensation
State Office of Administrative Hearings
Texas Court Cases
Resources & Tools
Workers Compensation Statutes
Government Code
Title 6. Public Officers and Employees
Subtitle A. Provisions Generally Applicable to Public Officers and Employees
Title 10. General Government
Subtitle A. Administrative Procedure and Practice
Insurance Code
Title 8. Health Insurance and Other Health Coverages
Subtitle D. Provider Plans
Title 14. Utilization Review and Independent Review
Labor Code
Title 2. Protection of Laborers
Subtitle E. Regulation of Certain Occupations
Title 5. Workers' Compensation
Workers Compensation Regulations
Title 1. Administration
Part 7. State Office of Administrative Hearings
Title 28. Insurance
Part 1. Texas Department of Insurance
Chapter 19. Agents Licensing
Part 2. Texas Department of Insurance Division of Workers Compensation
(Claims Before Jan. 1, 1991)
(Claims On or After Jan. 1, 1991)
Part 3. Texas Certified Self-Insurer Guaranty Association
Part 4. State Office of Risk Management
Part 6. Office of Injured Employee Counsel
Title 40. Social Services and Assistance
Part 20. Texas Workforce Commission
Chapter 815. Unemployment Insurance
Chapter 19. Agents Licensing
Subchapter B. Benefits, Claims, and Appeals
Latest Court Cases
Taylor v. Norton
Although this case does not arise from the Texas Workers’ Compensation system, it is relevant because it interprets how statutory definitions, particularly “family” and “consanguinity,” continue to operate even after termination of parental rights. The court held that biological descent, not legal parental status, controls whether someone qualifies as “family”
- Citation: 06-25-00014-CV
- Court: 6th COA – Texarkana
- Date:
Lee v. Grand Prairie Independent School District
This case arises directly from a workers’ compensation judicial-review suit, but the court did not reach any compensability or extent-of-injury issues. Instead, the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the claimant filed her notice of appeal more than 50 days after the extended deadline, and she did not
- Citation: 03-25-00243-CV
- Court: 3rd COA – Austin
- Date:
Harris County v. Doe
Although this case was pled as a TTCA premises-defect/intentional-injury suit, it arises from a workplace sexual assault at a county jail and directly implicates the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act’s exclusive-remedy rule. The court held that all claims against Harris County and its officials had to be dismissed because (1) the
- Citation: 01-24-00096-CV
- Court: 1st COA – Houston
- Date:
George v. Amazon.com Services LLC
This federal case does not arise under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, but it is directly relevant to nonsubscriber injury claims because it enforces Amazon’s arbitration agreement contained in its Texas injury-benefit plan. The court held that the employee was not exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act’s transportation-worker exception, meaning
- Citation: 4:24-CV-1063-SDJ
- Court: Eastern Dist. Ct. - Texas
- Date:
LKQ Automotive v. Romo
The El Paso Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of LKQ and Duron’s motion to compel arbitration. The court held the employee qualified for the FAA § 1 transportation-worker exemption, so the FAA did not require arbitration. Because appellants did not seek enforcement under the TAA or other state law,
- Citation: 08-25-00104-CV
- Court: 8th COA – El Paso
- Date:
Law Offices of Miller & Bicklein PC v. Ace American Insurance Company
The Austin Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of claims by the Law Offices of Miller & Bicklein and Daniel Miramontes seeking to shift attorney’s fees to the workers’ compensation carrier. The court held that because Miramontes did not appeal the December 2022 judgment—which awarded over $80,000 in attorney’s fees
- Citation: 03-25-00215-CV
- Court: 15th COA - Austin
- Date:
Latest AP Decisions
APD 251710
The Appeals Panel reversed and remanded the ALJ’s decision because the ALJ misstated the mechanism of injury—describing a fall over a drain instead of the actual electrocution while working on a powerline. Because this factual error affected the extent-of-injury determination, the Appeals Panel returned the case for a new decision
- Appeals Panel
APD 251691
The Appeals Panel affirmed the ALJ’s extent-of-injury findings and the correct disability period but reversed other portions of the decision. The Panel held that the ALJ exceeded the scope of the disability issue by awarding disability outside the agreed dates, and those portions were struck. The Panel also ruled that
- Appeals Panel
APD 251632
The Appeals Panel affirmed the ALJ’s extent-of-injury determination but reformed the decision to include the parties’ stipulation that statutory MMI was September 9, 2025. Because the Decision was signed after the statutory MMI date, the Panel held it was legal error for the ALJ to find the claimant had not
- Appeals Panel
APD 251609
The Appeals Panel reversed the ALJ’s award of first-quarter SIBs because the ALJ made an unappealed finding that the claimant’s underemployment during the qualifying periods was not a direct result of the compensable injury, which legally bars SIBs entitlement for both quarters. Based on that binding finding, the Panel rendered
- Appeals Panel
APD 251621
The Appeals Panel reversed all disputed determinations because the designated doctor did not have the complete medical record, including the missing emergency department records he expressly requested, before issuing opinions on extent of injury, MMI, IR, and disability.
- Appeals Panel
APD 251625
The Appeals Panel affirmed the ALJ’s extent-of-injury, MMI, and IR determinations but reformed the decision to correct clerical errors.
- Appeals Panel
News For You