Texas Codes
Tex. Lab. Code § 410.255 (2026)
Judicial Review Of Issues Other Than Compensability Or Income Or Death Benefits
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 410.255. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ISSUES OTHER THAN COMPENSABILITY OR INCOME OR DEATH BENEFITS. (a) For all issues other than those covered under Section 410.301(a), judicial review shall be conducted in the manner provided for judicial review of a contested case under Subchapter G, Chapter 2001, Government Code.
(b) Judicial review conducted under this section is governed by the substantial evidence rule.
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 269, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 76, Sec. 5.95(53), eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 58
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: Cont'l Cas. Ins. Co. v. Functional Restoration Assocs., 19 S.W.3d 393 (Tex. 2000).
Cont'l Cas. Ins. Co. v. Functional Restoration Assocs., 19 S.W.3d 393 (Tex. 2000). “" In support of its claim, Continental's petition states that the Commission's: findings, inferences, and conclusions, and decisions are unlawful and improper because of one or more of the following: 1.”
Rodriguez v. Serv. Lloyds Ins. Co., 997 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. 1999). “See TEX. LAB.CODE §§ 410.255, 410.301; Garcia, 893 S.”
Texas Workers' Comp. Comm'n v. Garcia, 893 S.W.2d 504 (Tex. 1995). “[27] Tex.Lab.Code § 410.255. Although plaintiffs argue in conclusory fashion that this procedure also violates the right to jury trial, none of the parties have briefed this specific issue.”
Texas Prop. & Cas. Guar. Ass'n v. Nat'l Am. Ins. Co., 208 S.W.3d 523 (Tex. App. 2006). “First, observing that NAIC initially filed its judicial review suit in McLennan County, TPCIGA argues that the Travis County district court had exclusive subject-matter jurisdiction to entertain NAIC’s suit, see Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.255; Tex. Gov’t Code Ann.”
Morales v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 241 S.W.3d 514 (Tex. 2007). “Tex. Lab.Code § 410.255(a); Tex. Gov’t Code § 2001.”
Morales v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 169 S.W.3d 485 (Tex. App. 2005). “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. §§ 410.255, 410.301; Rodriguez, 997 S.”
Robert Croysdill v. Old Repub. Ins. Co., 490 S.W.3d 287 (Tex. App. 2016). “Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 410.255 (b); see Texas Prop.”
Hartford Ins. Co. v. Crain, 246 S.W.3d 374 (Tex. App. 2008). “” Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.255 (West 2006).”
Cervantes v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 130 S.W.3d 152 (Tex. App. 2004). “See Tex.Lab.Code Ann. § 410.255; see also Tex.”
Holmans v. Transource Polymers, Inc., 914 S.W.2d 189 (Tex. App. 1996). “Tex.Labor Code Ann. § 410.255 (Vernon Pamph.”
Texas Workers' Comp. Ins. Fund v. Texas Workers' Comp. Comm'n, 124 S.W.3d 813 (Tex. App. 2003). “176(b)(1) (West 2000); Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.255 (West 1996).”
In Re Pepsico, Inc., 87 S.W.3d 787 (Tex. App. 2002). “2002) *790 as not permitting the use of mandamus to enforce the mandatory venue provision of Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.255(a) (Vernon 1996).”
— Tex. Lab. Code § 410.255(a) — 10 cases
Cont'l Cas. Ins. Co. v. Functional Restoration Assocs., 19 S.W.3d 393 (Tex. 2000). “" In support of its claim, Continental's petition states that the Commission's: findings, inferences, and conclusions, and decisions are unlawful and improper because of one or more of the following: 1.”
Morales v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 241 S.W.3d 514 (Tex. 2007). “Tex. Lab.Code § 410.255(a); Tex. Gov’t Code § 2001.”
In Re Pepsico, Inc., 87 S.W.3d 787 (Tex. App. 2002). “2002) *790 as not permitting the use of mandamus to enforce the mandatory venue provision of Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.255(a) (Vernon 1996).”
State Off. of Risk Mgmt. v. Herrera, 288 S.W.3d 543 (Tex. App. 2009).
State Off. of Risk Mgmt. v. Herrera, 189 S.W.3d 405 (Tex. App. 2006).
— Tex. Lab. Code § 410.255(b) — 5 cases
Sec. Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Farmer, 89 S.W.3d 197 (Tex. App. 2002).
Facility Ins. Corp. v. Patients Med. Ctr., 574 S.W.3d 436 (Tex. App. 2018).
Facility Ins. Corp. v. Patients Med. Ctr. (Tex. App. 2019).
Facility Ins. Corp. v. Patients Med. Ctr. (Tex. App. 2022).
The Univ. of Texas Rio Grande Valley v. Rita Oteka (Tex. 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.