355 S.W.3d 375
Tex. App.2011Background
- Baker sustained a July 12, 2000 work injury; dispute over whether the compensable injury includes a 2005 left knee meniscus tear seen on MRI.
- July 2000 MRI suggested degenerative tear; arthroscopy in 2000 found no tear and involved other knee procedures.
- Baker later had ongoing knee symptoms; May 2001 MRI showed degenerative changes but no clear Grade III/IV tear.
- December 5, 2005 MRI revealed a complex tear; Division ruled the compensable injury extended to include the 2005 tear; Continental challenged this ruling.
- Cont’l sought judicial review; trial court allowed expert testimony and a PowerPoint opening; jury answered No on whether July 2000 injury extended to the 2005 tear; on rehearing the court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Producing-cause instruction error regarding Crump standard | Continental argues producing cause not applicable and definition flawed | Baker argues error preserved and standard appropriate | Reversible error; instruction misstated Crump standard |
Key Cases Cited
- Transcon. Ins. Co. v. Crump, 274 S.W.3d 86 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist] 2008) (producing cause requires substantial factor; but-for component considered essential (later affirmed/overruled))
- Crump, 330 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. 2010) (producing cause in workers' comp: substantial factor; but-for included; defective definition reversible)
- Ford Motor Co. v. Ledesma, 242 S.W.3d 32 (Tex. 2007) (producing-cause framework in products liability applied)
- Morales v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 241 S.W.3d 514 (Tex. 2007) (burden of proof on appeal; preponderance standard in workers' comp)