holding that a trial court exceeded its authority in ordering the SIF to pay benefits to a claimant where the Act did not grant Texas courts any authority to make such an order
How later courts described this case
- holding that a trial court exceeded its authority in ordering the SIF to pay benefits to a claimant where the Act did not grant Texas courts any authority to make such an order
- rejecting argument that the ability to carry groceries or open doors undermined a finding that the hands lack substantial utility
- “When a court is the trier of fact, it is to consider the decision of the Division’s Appeals Panel.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
PATRICIA 0. ALVAREZ, Justice,
concurring.
Because I agree that the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s determination that De Los Santos is entitled to Lifetime Income Benefits, and that the trial court erred in ordering the Subsequent Injury Fund to pay Lifetime Income Benefits, I concur in the majority’s analysis and holding. I respectfully disagree, however, with the majority’s modification of the judgment. I would simply modify the judgment to delete the language requiring the Subsequent Injury Fund to pay Lifetime Income Benefits.