CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 18, 1971

Claim of Bernsley v. Telemarine Communications Co.

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board which allowed a claim for death benefits. The decedent, a principal in the appellant corporation, died from cardiac failure during an emotional discussion about a vault tax assessed against a related corporation and paid by the appellant. The board found that the tax problems arose from decedent's employment with the appellant and that the emotional strain caused his death. The court affirmed the board’s finding that the problems over the vault tax arose out of and during the course of decedent’s employment and that the emotional strain and anxiety from dealing with the tax problems caused decedent’s death.

Death benefitsCardiac failureEmotional strainEmployment-related deathVault taxWorkmen's Compensation Board appealCausationSubstantial evidenceEmployer liability
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 17, 2006

D.I.S., LLC v. Sagos

This case concerns an appeal by a mortgagee from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, which granted the mortgagor's petition to direct the mortgagee to accept a specific sum in full satisfaction of the mortgage debt and issue a satisfaction of mortgage. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's order, ruling that the mortgagor's tender of payment of the entire mortgage principal plus interest, in response to the mortgagee's acceleration of debt, did not constitute a 'prepayment' within the meaning of the mortgage's prepayment clause. Consequently, the mortgagee was precluded from assessing a prepayment penalty as no such provision was specified in the mortgage. Additionally, the court declined to consider the mortgagee’s remaining contention regarding the acceleration clause because it was raised for the first time in her reply brief.

Mortgage LawPrepayment PenaltyMortgage Debt SatisfactionAcceleration of DebtRPAPL 1921Appellate ProcedureCivil ProcedureNassau County Supreme CourtContractual ProvisionsTender of Payment
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Adamski v. Barnhart

Plaintiff Richard M. Adamski sued the Commissioner of Social Security under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c) to review the denial of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Adamski, born in 1952 with a history of back problems and surgeries, alleged disability since 1998 due to recurrent back problems. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found him not disabled, a decision affirmed by the Appeals Council. The court reviewed the ALJ's five-step disability evaluation, concluding that the ALJ correctly applied legal standards and that her decision is supported by substantial evidence regarding Adamski's residual functional capacity for light work, his treating physician's opinions, and his pain complaints. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, and Adamski's motion was denied, leading to the dismissal of the action with prejudice.

Disability BenefitsSocial Security ActALJ Decision ReviewResidual Functional CapacityTreating Physician RuleVocational Expert TestimonyCredibility AssessmentBack DisorderKnee DisorderLight Work
References
38
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Romanelli v. Long Island Railroad

Frank Romanelli sued his employer, the Long Island Railroad Company (LIRR), under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), alleging that his work as a track worker exposed him to hazardous environmental contaminants, causing pulmonary and cardiac problems. LIRR filed three motions in limine to preclude Romanelli's medical experts from testifying on causation, Romanelli from testifying about exposure to toxins at unsafe levels, and Romanelli from testifying that LIRR had a duty to provide a respirator. The court granted the motions in part and denied in part. It allowed treating physicians to testify on the causation of respiratory issues by workplace exposures due to common knowledge, but not on the link between pulmonary and cardiac problems without demonstrated methodology. Romanelli was permitted to testify about his first-hand exposure to dust, fumes, and chemicals but not to label them as 'hazardous contaminants' or at 'unsafe' levels. Lastly, Romanelli could not testify about LIRR's legal duty to provide a respirator, but could testify about not being provided one despite requests and that its absence caused him to ingest more harmful substances.

FELAMotions in LimineExpert Witness TestimonyLay Witness TestimonyCausationEvidentiary StandardsWorkplace ExposurePulmonary ConditionsCardiac ConditionsRespirator Requirements
References
18
Case No. OXN 126995
Regular
Nov 07, 2007

CHARLES DURHAM vs. MISSION LINEN SUPPLY, SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT, ACCELERATED CLAIMS SERVICES, INC

This case involves a workers' compensation claim where the applicant sustained a low back injury. The core dispute centers on whether cognitive behavioral therapy is a compensable medical treatment for the applicant's chronic pain resulting from a failed surgery, despite the defendant's arguments about a non-industrial psychiatric component. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the Administrative Law Judge's report that emphasized the treating physician and Qualified Medical Examiner recommendations supporting the therapy as essential to relieve the effects of the orthopedic injury.

Cognitive behavioral therapyFailed back surgeryPain managementQualified Medical ExaminerUtilization ReviewLabor Code § 3208.3Labor Code § 4600Labor Code § 4610Labor Code § 4062Compensable psychiatric injury
References
5
Case No. GRO 0020213
Regular
May 28, 2008

Sandra K. Carnahan vs. Albertsons Stores, Inc., Specialty Risk Services

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's petition for reconsideration as it was not a final order, but granted removal. The Board found substantial evidence, including the primary treating physician's report and a utilization review certification, supported the applicant's need for a urological consultation due to urinary problems secondary to her industrial back injury. Therefore, the Board rescinded the WCJ's decision and ordered the defendant to provide the applicant with a urological consultation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalWCJFindings of FactUrological consultationLumbar injuryNeural innervationUrinary tract infectionsUtilization review
References
10
Case No. VNO 0492098
Regular
Feb 07, 2008

LAILA BOUCHER vs. 21ST CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, AIG Claim Services, Inc.

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration on its own motion due to a lack of substantial evidence supporting the Workers' Compensation Judge's (WCJ) findings on permanent disability and apportionment. The WCJ declared the medical reports regarding the applicant's back problems not credible, yet issued rating instructions not based on medical evidence. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including the potential appointment of an Agreed Medical Evaluator to supplement the record.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationApportionmentPermanent DisabilitySubstantial EvidenceMedical TreatmentQualified Medical EvaluatorPrimary Treating PhysicianWCJAgreed Medical Evaluator
References
3
Case No. ADJ417505 (STK 173008)
Regular
Oct 07, 2008

MARSHA CRISWELL vs. COUNTY OF STANISLAUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award of left ankle surgery for applicant Marsha Criswell. The Board found no substantial medical evidence connecting Criswell's current ankle condition to her 2000 industrial injury, noting the ankle injury resolved and a new injury occurred in 2005. Therefore, the applicant failed to meet her burden of proof for industrial causation of the current ankle problem.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationMedical CausationIndustrial InjuryLeft Ankle SurgeryAgreed Medical ExaminerTreating PhysicianPreponderance of the EvidenceReasonable Medical ProbabilityLay Testimony
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jarvis v. Stewart Airport Diner

The claimant, a waitress with a history of back problems, sought workers' compensation benefits after experiencing sudden numbness while working. The Workers' Compensation Board ruled that she suffered an occupational disease due to the aggravation of a preexisting dormant condition, awarding her benefits. The employer appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's ruling, concluding that there was substantial evidence to support the finding that the claimant's employment aggravated her dormant back condition, leading to a new disability.

Occupational diseasePreexisting conditionAggravation of injuryWorkers' compensation benefitsWaitressingBack injuryDisabilitySubstantial evidenceRepetitive occupational microtraumaDormant condition
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kubica v. New York State Employees' Retirement System

The petitioner sought ordinary disability retirement benefits, but the Comptroller denied the application. The case involved conflicting medical opinions regarding the petitioner's ability to return to work as a food service worker due to chronic disc problems. The court upheld the Comptroller's decision, stating that the Comptroller could properly credit the opinion of the respondent's physician, who found the petitioner not permanently disabled. Since the determination was supported by substantial evidence, it was confirmed, and the petition was dismissed.

Disability Retirement BenefitsMedical Opinion ConflictSubstantial Evidence ReviewComptroller DeterminationFood Service WorkerChronic Disc ProblemsAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewArticle 78 Proceeding
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 158 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational