 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Chavis v. State Worker's Compensation Division6/13/1996
This is an appeal of the trial court's judgement in a claim for worker 's compensation benefits arising under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act as it existed prior to January 1, 1991. Following an award of worker 's compensation benefits to appellant, appellee filed suit to set aside the award.
Appellant then counterclaimed and challenged the amount of the award. Following a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict for the appellee and the trial court entered judgement accordingly.
Appellant then timely perfected her appeal and asserts four points of error.
Facts
From 1985 to 1989, appellant Bobbie Jean Chavis worked for the Texas Department of Human Services (TDHS) as a PBX operator. Up until June 15, 1988, appellant was supervised by Sherron Abbott, the office manager. Ms. Abbott supervised the switchboard operator, mailroom, and the print shop. After Ms. Abbott ceased employment with TDHS, Ms. Margie Pass took over the position vacated by Ms. Abbott.
Appellant contends that Ms. Pass increased appellant's workload and started to harass appellant.
Appellant alleges that due to her relationship with Ms. Pass, she developed stress and "angina".
Appellant sought medical treatment for her health problems. In an attempt to establish a definite time, place, and cause, appellant alleges she sustained an accidental injury on or about April 7, 1989, when, in the scope and course of her employment after lifting heavy boxes in the mail room she began to experience excruciating chest pains. Prior to the time Ms. Pass became her supervisor, appellant states she was in fair health and had never experienced any of the symptoms she subsequently suffered; i.e., dizziness, blurred vision, and excruciating chest pains.
After the April 7, 1989, episode, appellant filed a claim for worker 's compensation with the Industrial Accident Board and the Texas Worker 's Compensation Commission found that appellant sustained an injury or occupational disease on April 7, 1989, in the course of her employment and awarded her benefits. Following this award, the Worker's Compensation Division filed suit to set aside the award.
Appellant answered and filed a cross action against the State for full worker 's compensation , lump sum distribution, medical expenses, disability and incapacity, breach of good faith and fair dealing, and damages. The parties were subsequently realigned with appellant as plaintiff and the State as defendant. A jury trial was held beginning on January 9, 1995. The jury returned a verdict in favor of appellee.
Appellant brings forth four points of error which are overruled, and the judgement of the trial court is thus affirmed.
Appellant's first point of error urges " he trial court erred in denying Chavis' motion for a new trial because there is no evidence, or the verdict is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence."
This is a worker's compensation case in which the plaintiff/appellant had the burden of proof by the preponderance of the evidence to prove that while in the course and scope of her employment she received an injury as defined in the court's charge. The trial court has considerable discretion in the decision of submission of issues in a worker's compensation trial; the manner of submission in this case was a variance from the pattern jury charges. The trial judge fashioned the issue and submitted "injury" and "producing cause" in one issue; because of his dual submission in one issue, an extended analysis of the facts is necessary. The following issue was submitted: Answer only the questions that you are specifically instruc
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|