CompFox AI Summary
Gibson Plumbing Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc. (Gibson) and Robin L. Hughes appealed a judgment in favor of Coolbaugh Chiropractic for services rendered to Hughes, a Gibson employee. Hughes, a part-time customer service representative, injured her back at work and sought treatment from her chiropractor, Coolbaugh. Gibson did not have workers’ compensation but a reimbursement policy with a $1,000 deductible. The dispute arose over whether Gibson’s bookkeeper, Leah Ray, had the authority to authorize multiple medical treatments for Hughes and whether Coolbaugh properly presented the claim for attorney’s fees. The trial court rendered judgment against Gibson for $3,000 plus attorney’s fees and against Hughes for $9,425 plus attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court, finding sufficient evidence of Ray's actual authority and that the damages award was within the range of evidence.
Levohn H. Brown v. Shanda Vance is a workers' compensation case decided in Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo). This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo).
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Gibson Plumbing Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc. (Gibson) and Robin L. Hughes appealed a judgment in favor of Coolbaugh Chiropractic for services rendered to Hughes, a Gibson employee. Hughes, a part-time customer service representative, injured her back at work and sought treatment from her chiropractor, Coolbaugh. Gibson did not have workers’ compensation but a reimbursement policy with a $1,000 deductible. The dispute arose over whether Gibson’s bookkeeper, Leah Ray, had the authority to authorize multiple medical treatments for Hughes and whether Coolbaugh properly presented the claim for attorney’s fees. The trial court rendered judgment against Gibson for $3,000 plus attorney’s fees and against Hughes for $9,425 plus attorney’s fees. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court, finding sufficient evidence of Ray's actual authority and that the damages award was within the range of evidence.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.