‍

A roofer got hurt on the job, and now a $4.6 million verdict is up in the air. What looked like a simple work injury case has been filled with surprise reversals and will now be decided by the Texas Supreme Court.

The Fall 

In 2018, Jose Medellin fell two stories off a roof at a San Antonio apartment complex while working for JMI Contractors. There were no warning lines and no fall protection, and multiple supervisors were on site directing the work. Medellin suffered serious injuries to his leg, hip, and elbow. He sued JMI, and a jury found the company responsible for controlling jobsite safety and failing to protect him, awarding $4.6 million in damages.

Verdict Whiplash 

That verdict didn’t last long. In 2023, the court of appeals reversed and ordered a new trial after concluding the jury never heard a key part of Medellin’s deposition — that he drank one beer and smoked half a marijuana cigarette about five hours before the fall. A coworker also described Medellin as looking “dizzy” and “drunk” as he fell. For a moment, it looked like Medellin's entire case might be lost. 

But in August 2024, the appeals court withdrew its opinion and reinstated the $4.6 million verdict. Medellin’s lawyers successfully argued that excluding the deposition testimony was harmless. The court pointed to medical records that were admitted at trial showing no alcohol in Medellin’s system by the time he reached the hospital and no evidence of legal impairment.

Another appeal by JMI has sent this case to the Texas Supreme Court, who will have the final say. 

Texas Supreme Court To Decide The Case 

During oral arguments on January 15, the justices focused less on whether Medellin was impaired and more on who should decide close evidentiary questions — judges or juries. The Chief Justice questioned why jurors weren’t allowed to hear about the beer and marijuana use and decide for themselves whether five hours mattered. Medellin’s lawyer warned that allowing subjective testimony would unfairly prejudice injured workers, while JMI argued the jury should have heard all the facts.

Watch the video above for the full breakdown, and Dmitry’s take.