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

Part 20. Texas Workforce Commission

Chapter 815. Unemployment Insurance
Subchapter B. Benefits, Claims, and Appeals

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

Rodriguez v. Christmas Tree Company

The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that the employee’s negligence claims were barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. The court found undisputed evidence that Rodriguez was an employee acting within the course and scope of employment, that

Texas Association of Counties Risk Management Pool v. Adams

The Beaumont Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s denial of TACRMP’s plea to the jurisdiction and rendered judgment dismissing Dianna Adams’s claims for want of jurisdiction. The court held that TACRMP, as a governmental risk pool, was entitled to governmental immunity and was not the “insurance carrier” against whom

R&L Carriers Shared Services LLC v. Gonzalez

The court of appeals reversed the trial court and held that the employer and co-worker were entitled to compel arbitration of the wrongful-death claims arising from a workplace accident under a valid nonsubscriber arbitration agreement. The court determined the agreement was enforceable against the decedent’s beneficiaries because their claims were

Hill v. Brazoria County

The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment denying workers’ compensation death benefits, holding there was no reliable evidence that the decedent’s COVID-19 infection constituted a compensable occupational disease. The court upheld the exclusion of the claimant’s expert, finding his opinions unreliable and based on unsupported assumptions about workplace exposure. Without

In re Citgo Petroleum Corporation

The court did not reach the merits of the workers’ compensation issue because the mandamus proceeding became moot after the parties settled the underlying dispute. The employer had challenged the denial of summary judgment based on the exclusive-remedy defense under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. However, due to settlement, the

Argyle v. Miller

This case isn’t a workers’ compensation benefits dispute in the usual sense, but it still brushes up against that world because it involves a nonsubscriber workplace injury plan replacing traditional comp coverage. The court of appeals reversed the trial court and held that the dispute had to go to arbitration

Latest AP Decisions

APD 260323

The Appeals Panel affirmed the ALJ’s determination that the claimant had disability from July 10, 2025, through December 28, 2025, while the unappealed finding of no disability from December 29, 2025, through the CCH became final. It reversed the ALJ’s determination that Dr. L’s July 1, 2024 MMI/IR certification did

APD 260534

The Appeals Panel reversed and remanded the ALJ’s determination that Dr. G’s May 8, 2025 MMI/IR certification did not become final under Section 408.123 and Rule 130.12. The Panel held that the certification was valid despite a typographical error in the certification date because it was signed by an authorized

APD 260515

The Appeals Panel affirmed the ALJ’s determination that the claimant had disability from May 1, 2025, through the contested case hearing. It reversed the finding that Dr. R’s February 1, 2024 MMI/IR certification was not delivered by verifiable means, holding that delivery occurred on February 24, 2024, and remanded for

APD 260490

The Appeals Panel affirmed the ALJ’s finding that the compensable injury did not include an L5-S1 disc protrusion but found the decision incomplete for failing to address whether it included an L5-S1 disc herniation. The case was reversed in part and remanded for further findings on that unresolved extent-of-injury issue.

APD 260374

The Appeals Panel reversed the ALJ’s denial of supplemental income benefits after finding the decision was based on a material misstatement of the evidence regarding the claimant’s job search efforts. The record showed the claimant met the required number of weekly job searches, contrary to the ALJ’s finding.

APD 260449

The Appeals Panel reversed the ALJ’s decision denying extent of injury to multiple left shoulder conditions after finding the ALJ abused her discretion by failing to issue a Presiding Officer’s Directive to the designated doctor. Because the designated doctor never evaluated the disputed conditions due to administrative error, the case

News For You