APD 251790
The Appeals Panel reversed and rendered the ALJ’s decision, holding that the claimant, a peace officer, did sustain a compensable injury in a motor vehicle accident. Applying Orozco v. County of El Paso, the Panel concluded that the claimant’s travel in an employer-provided patrol vehicle, after signing in with dispatch and while being paid and subject to duty, originated in and furthered the employer’s law-enforcement affairs. The evidence established that the coming-and-going rule did not bar compensability under these circumstances.
APD 250488
The Appeals Panel reversed the administrative law judge’s decision and held that the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury because the injury occurred while the claimant was intoxicated. Although the judge initially found that an injury occurred in the course and scope of employment, the unappealed finding of intoxication barred recovery under Texas Labor Code § 406.032(1)(A).
APD 250174
The Appeals Panel affirmed the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) determination that the self-insured did not waive its right to contest compensability by failing to timely contest the injury. However, it reversed the ALJ’s finding that the self-insured specifically contested compensability under Section 409.022 and Rule 124.2(f), because the defense under Section 406.032(1)(D) was raised for the first time in a supplemental denial and not shown to be based on newly discovered evidence. The case was remanded for the ALJ to determine whether the newly raised defense qualifies as newly discovered evidence, and to reconsider whether the claimant sustained a compensable injury in light of that determination.
APD 241728
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision because the Administrative Law Judge incorrectly found that the Employee-Decedent’s parents were not proper beneficiaries because they failed to prove they were dependents. The Appeals Panel noted that there is no requirement for eligible parents to show dependent status.
APD 240658
The Appeals Panel reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision because a potential legal beneficiary was not properly notified of the hearing.
APD 240484
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision because the Administrative Law Judge ALJ failed to make a finding of fact regarding good cause for a late filing of the DWC-41.
APD 240565
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision because the Administrative Law Judge failed to make a finding of fact on compensability.
APD 240353
The Appeals Panel reversed the decision because the administrative law judge failed to make findings of fact in regard to the disability issue.
APD 231843
The Appeals Panel reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision because the insurance company in the order was different than the one stipulated to by the parties.
APD 231750
The Appeals Panel reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision regarding the sufficiency of the carrier’s dispute. The Appeals Panel noted that “was riding a co-workers motorcycle recklessly” was sufficient for the horseplay defense.