Texas Codes
Tex. Lab. Code § 410.302 (2026)
Admissibility Of Records; Limitation Of Issues
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 410.302. ADMISSIBILITY OF RECORDS; LIMITATION OF ISSUES. (a) The records of a contested case hearing conducted under this chapter are admissible in a trial under this subchapter in accordance with the Texas Rules of Evidence.
(b) A trial under this subchapter is limited to issues decided by the appeals panel and on which judicial review is sought. The pleadings must specifically set forth the determinations of the appeals panel by which the party is aggrieved.
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 269, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 265 (H.B. 7), Sec. 3.204, eff. September 1, 2005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 85
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: Rodriguez v. Serv. Lloyds Ins. Co., 997 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. 1999).
Rodriguez v. Serv. Lloyds Ins. Co., 997 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. 1999). “See TEX. LAB. CODE § 410.302 (limiting trial to issues previously decided and challenged before appeals panel).”
State Off. of Risk Mgmt. v. Elaine E. Banks Joiner, 363 S.W.3d 242 (Tex. App. 2012). “Tex. Lab. Code Ann. §§ 410.302 -.303 (West 2006); Garcia, 893 S.”
Krueger v. Atascosa Cnty., 155 S.W.3d 614 (Tex. App. 2004). “Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.302 (Vernon 1996).”
S. Ins. Co. v. Brewster, 249 S.W.3d 6 (Tex. App. 2007). “308 (Vernon 2006) and the modified de novo standard, the trial court properly considered the decision of the appeals panel, as certified by the TWCC, in accordance with Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.304(a), (b). See Nat’l Liab.”
Combined Specialty Ins. Co. v. Deese, 266 S.W.3d 653 (Tex. App. 2008). “3d at 712 ; see also TEX. LAB.CODE ANN. § 410.302(b) (limiting the scope of judicial review to "issues decided by the appeals panel and on which judicial review is sought").”
Texas Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sonic Sys. Int'l, Inc., 214 S.W.3d 469 (Tex. App. 2007). “TEX. LAB.CODE ANN. § 410.302(b) (Vernon 2006); Ins.”
Texas Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sara Care Child Care Ctr., Inc., 324 S.W.3d 305 (Tex. App. 2010). “See Tex.Lab.Code Ann. § 410.302(b). The relationship between Sections 406.”
Morales v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 241 S.W.3d 514 (Tex. 2007). “See Tex. Lab.Code § 410.302(b). Thus, according to Liberty Mutual, the district court never had jurisdiction to decide that issue.”
Texas Dep't of Transp. v. Beckner, 74 S.W.3d 98 (Tex. App. 2002). “3d at 431 ; Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.302. 3 . The Reporter incorrectly cites to section "7” instead of section "5.”
In Re Tyler Asphalt & Gravel Co., Inc., 107 S.W.3d 832 (Tex. App. 2003). “Tex. Lab. Code Ann. §§ 410.302 .303; Sec.”
Joe Ballard v. Arch Ins. Co. & Transforce Inc., 478 S.W.3d 950 (Tex. App. 2015). “3d at 803-04 ; Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 410.302 (b) (West, Westlaw through 2015 R.”
Marts Ex Rel. Marts v. Transp. Ins., 111 S.W.3d 699 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 410.302 (limiting trial under section 410.”
— Tex. Lab. Code § 410.302(b) — 32 cases
Combined Specialty Ins. Co. v. Deese, 266 S.W.3d 653 (Tex. App. 2008). “3d at 712 ; see also TEX. LAB.CODE ANN. § 410.302(b) (limiting the scope of judicial review to "issues decided by the appeals panel and on which judicial review is sought").”
State Off. of Risk Mgmt. v. Elaine E. Banks Joiner, 363 S.W.3d 242 (Tex. App. 2012). “Tex. Lab. Code Ann. §§ 410.302 -.303 (West 2006); Garcia, 893 S.”
Texas Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sonic Sys. Int'l, Inc., 214 S.W.3d 469 (Tex. App. 2007). “TEX. LAB.CODE ANN. § 410.302(b) (Vernon 2006); Ins.”
Texas Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sara Care Child Care Ctr., Inc., 324 S.W.3d 305 (Tex. App. 2010). “See Tex.Lab.Code Ann. § 410.302(b). The relationship between Sections 406.”
Morales v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 241 S.W.3d 514 (Tex. 2007). “See Tex. Lab.Code § 410.302(b). Thus, according to Liberty Mutual, the district court never had jurisdiction to decide that issue.”
— Tex. Lab. Code § 410.302(e) — 1 case
Jesus Cervantes v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. (Tex. App. 2013).
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.