Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 23 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Texas Mutual Insurance Co. v. Ledbetter.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Mutual Insurance Co. v. Ledbetter Anchor | green | “there is nothing discretionary about this statute; a carrier's right to reimbursement is mandatory.” | 5 |
| 2 | Erivas v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. | green | “we find that the plain meaning of section 417.001 creates a right of subrogation against a third party who is or becomes liable to pay damages, including an employer's uim insurance carrier found liable to pay damages.” | 3 |
| 3 | Texas Workers' Compensation Insurance Fund v. Travis | green | “the trial court had no discretion to ignore the wording of the statute and apportion the settlement funds between the claimants before reimbursing the carrier.” | 3 |
| 4 | Liberty Mutual v. Kinser | green | “a workers' compensation carrier does not have a subrogation right to benefits paid an injured employee under the employee's uim coverage.” | 3 |
| 5 | Performance Insurance Co. v. Frans | green | “the trial court had no discretion to ignore the wording of the statute and apportion the settlement funds between the claimants before reimbursing the carrier.” | 3 |
| 6 | Texas Workers' Compensation Insurance Facility v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. | green | “the language of the subrogation statute does not expressly limit the carrier's rights to claims against third-party tortfeasors. clearly, it would have been easy to do so.” | 3 |
| 7 | Baker v. Argonaut Insurance Co. | green | “when the attorney has represented the insurance company's interests,” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.