Supreme Court
Univ. of Tex. Rio Grande Valley v. Oteka
- Case number: 23-0167
- Legal category: Workers' Compensation
- Subtype: Exclusive Jurisdiction
- Set for oral argument: February 20, 2025
Case Summary
In this personal‑injury case, the issue on appeal is whether an employee must obtain a predicate finding from the Division of Workers’ Compensation that her injuries did not occur in the course and scope of her employment for the trial court to have subject‑matter jurisdiction over her negligence claim against the employer.
A university professor was walking through the parking lot after attending a commencement ceremony when a vehicle driven by a university police officer struck and injured her. The professor sued the university for negligence. As an affirmative defense, the university asserted that workers’ compensation benefits are the exclusive remedy because the injuries occurred during the course and scope of her employment. Disputing that her injury was work related, the professor moved for partial summary judgment on the affirmative defense. The university then filed a plea to the jurisdiction, arguing that the Division has exclusive jurisdiction to determine the course‑and‑scope issue and that the professor therefore failed to exhaust her administrative remedies.
The trial court denied the plea, and the university appealed. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that exhaustion is not required because the professor’s suit is not based on the ultimate question whether she is eligible for workers’ compensation benefits.
The Supreme Court granted the university’s petition for review.
Case summaries are created by the Court's staff attorneys and law clerks and do not constitute the Court’s official descriptions or statements. Readers are encouraged to review the Court’s official opinions for specifics regarding each case.