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

Vogel v. Wells Fargo Guard Services

Walter Vogel, a 73-year-old security guard, sustained a work-related shoulder and back injury, leading to a trial court finding of 100% permanent and total disability. The trial court declared Tennessee Code Annotated Section 50-6-207(4)(A)(i) unconstitutional for its age-related benefit caps and awarded Vogel lifetime benefits. On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed, upholding the constitutionality of the statute's age-based distinctions for permanent total disability benefits under the Equal Protection Clause and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, finding them rationally related to the state's interest in tying workers' compensation to Social Security benefits. However, the Court found the statute's disparate treatment of permanent total versus permanent partial disability benefits for workers over sixty to be irrational, modifying the award to 260 weeks of benefits for the plaintiff.

Workers' CompensationAge DiscriminationEqual ProtectionConstitutional LawPermanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilitySocial Security BenefitsWage LossJudicial ReviewStatutory Interpretation
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Love v. American Olean Tile Co.

In this workers' compensation action, employee Patricia Love appealed a judgment awarding her permanent total disability benefits to age 65 or until a maximum total benefit, with apportionment between the employer, American Olean Tile Company/Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and the Second Injury Fund. The Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel affirmed the trial court. The Supreme Court granted review to address the applicability of the maximum total benefit cap to age 65 awards and the correctness of the apportionment. The Court reversed the lower courts' decision to apply the maximum total benefit, ruling that permanent total disability benefits are payable to age 65 without monetary cap. It affirmed the apportionment, holding the employer responsible for 32.5% and the Second Injury Fund for 67.5% under Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-208(a).

Permanent Total DisabilityWorkers' CompensationSecond Injury FundBenefit ApportionmentMaximum Benefit CapAge 65 BenefitsCarpal Tunnel SyndromeLow Back StrainPre-existing DisabilityAppellate Review
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jones v. Lumber

Claimant appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision denying further compensation under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (3) (v) after he turned 62, arguing he should be entitled to full old-age benefits at 65. The Board interpreted "entitled to receive" as "eligible to receive" Social Security old-age benefits, which begins at age 62, thus terminating additional compensation. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, agreeing that eligibility for partial old-age benefits at 62 ceases workers' compensation under the statute, regardless of receiving disability benefits or delaying full old-age benefits.

Workers' Compensation BenefitsPermanent Partial DisabilitySocial Security BenefitsOld-Age BenefitsBenefit EligibilityStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewCompensation TerminationMinimum Retirement AgeNew York Workers' Compensation Law
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Tucker v. Foamex, L.P.

James C. Tucker, a 59-year-old employee of Foamex, L.P., suffered a left shoulder injury in May 1998, leading to a 92 percent permanent partial disability. The trial court awarded him 368 weeks of workers' compensation benefits. Foamex, L.P. appealed, arguing that under Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-207(4)(A)(i), Tucker's benefits should be capped at age 65. The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, ruling that the age-65 limitation in the statute does not apply to employees under 60 who sustain a permanent partial disability to the body as a whole, thus allowing Tucker to receive benefits past his sixty-fifth birthday. The Court noted potential anomalies in the statute and encouraged legislative review.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityAge LimitationStatutory InterpretationTennessee LawShoulder InjuryBenefits CalculationSupreme CourtEmployer AppealTrial Court Affirmation
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stratton v. DEPARTMENT FOR AGING CITY OF NEW YORK

Plaintiff Joyce Stratton sued the New York City Department for the Aging (DFTA) and Commissioner Prema Mathai-Davis for age discrimination and retaliation after her termination at age 61 and failure to be rehired. A jury found for Stratton, awarding $500,000 in damages, determining age was a factor and the non-rehire was retaliatory and willful. Defendants moved for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial, arguing insufficient evidence, erroneous admission of statistical evidence, and excessive damages. Plaintiff cross-moved for front pay and restoration of benefits. The court denied defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law and new trial regarding statistical evidence. The motion for a new trial due to excessive damages was denied on condition that plaintiff accept a remittitur reducing the award from $500,000 to $373,886.23. Plaintiff's motion for front pay and benefits, totaling $378,000, was granted.

Age DiscriminationRetaliationEmployment LawJury VerdictPost-trial MotionsJudgment as a Matter of LawNew TrialRemittiturFront PayBack Pay
References
30
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bomely v. Mid-America Corp.

Justice Holder concurs with the majority's decision that permanently and totally disabled employees are entitled to benefits until age 65. However, he dissents from the majority's method of dividing liability between the employer and the Second Injury Fund, arguing it deviates from legislative intent and deters the employment of disabled individuals. He also disagrees with the majority's approach of applying both subsections (a) and (b) of Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-208 in permanent total disability cases. Justice Holder advocates for a clear distinction: subsection (a) should apply when a subsequent injury causes permanent total disability, limiting employer liability to the disability caused by the subsequent injury alone, typically the first 400 weeks. Subsection (b) should apply only when an employee can still work but has combined compensable vocational disabilities exceeding 100 percent. He suggests affirming the trial court's finding of a 20 percent disability under subsection (a) for the employer, with the Second Injury Fund responsible for the remaining benefits until age 65.

Second Injury FundEmployer LiabilityPermanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityWorkers' CompensationStatutory InterpretationHandicapped EmploymentVocational DisabilityPreexisting ConditionsLegislative Intent
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cutler v. 65 Security Plan

The case concerns the financial distress of The 65 Security Plan, a Taft-Hartley multiemployer trust fund providing welfare benefits, which faces a significant deficit and numerous outstanding claims from health care providers and participants. Litigation costs from hundreds of lawsuits are depleting the Fund's limited assets. To safeguard these assets and establish an equitable distribution, the court granted a preliminary stay on all state and federal proceedings against the Fund and its beneficiaries. A Special Master, the Honorable Milton Mollen, was appointed to aid in asset maximization and settlement plan development. The court explores various legal devices, including bankruptcy, receivership, and class action, ultimately favoring a 'quasi bankruptcy' approach combining elements of these to achieve a swift and cost-effective resolution for all creditors through negotiated settlement.

Employee BenefitsTrust Fund InsolvencyPreliminary InjunctionAll Writs ActERISA LitigationBankruptcy EligibilityQuasi BankruptcyClass Action (Mandatory)Special Master AppointmentHealth Care Claims
References
70
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 16, 2006

Fortis Benefits v. Cantu

Vanessa Cantu suffered severe injuries in a car accident and sued multiple parties. Her medical insurer, Fortis Benefits, intervened, seeking subrogation for medical benefits paid under the policy. After Cantu settled with the defendants, Fortis pursued recovery from Cantu. Cantu argued that the equitable "made whole" doctrine barred Fortis's claim because her total losses exceeded the settlement amount plus the benefits Fortis paid. The trial court and court of appeals sided with Cantu. The Texas Supreme Court reversed, holding that the "made whole" doctrine does not override an insurer's clear contractual subrogation rights. The Court affirmed the dismissal of Fortis's claims against Ford due to a pretrial agreement.

Insurance SubrogationMade Whole DoctrineContractual SubrogationEquitable SubrogationERISATexas LawInsurance Policy InterpretationPersonal InjuryAutomobile AccidentSettlement Proceeds
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 22, 1984

Barnhardt v. Hudson Valley District Council of Carpenters Benefit Funds

The plaintiff, injured in May 1978 during maintenance work, was denied workers' compensation due to the absence of an employer-employee relationship. Subsequently, he sought reimbursement for medical expenses from the Hudson Valley District Council of Carpenters Benefit Funds (Benefit Funds) through a union insurance policy. Continental Assurance Company (Continental), Benefit Funds' insurer, rejected the claim, citing an employment-related injury exclusion in the policy. The plaintiff then initiated an action against Benefit Funds, which in turn filed a third-party action against Continental seeking indemnification. Continental's motion for summary judgment, asserting the exclusion, was denied by the County Court. The appellate court affirmed this denial, ruling that the exclusionary language was ambiguous and applied only in cases where a clear employer-employee relationship existed, a fact still to be determined.

Insurance Policy InterpretationEmployment StatusWorkers' Compensation ExclusionSummary Judgment MotionContractual AmbiguityGroup Health InsuranceMedical Expense ReimbursementThird-Party ActionAppellate ReviewEmployer-Employee Relationship
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 08, 2016

Tex. Dep't of Aging & Disability Servs. v. Lagunas

The Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services (DADS) appealed the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in a case filed by Michael Lagunas. Lagunas, a 60-year-old security officer at DADS' El Paso State Supported Living Center, applied for an Assistant Unit Director position. Although initially selected for the role, the Director, Laura Cazabon-Braley, intervened and prevented his hiring, allegedly due to his age, and later reorganized the department, creating new positions for which Lagunas was not qualified. Lagunas filed charges of discrimination, alleging age discrimination and subsequent retaliation. The appellate court partly sustained DADS' appeal, ruling that certain claims in Lagunas' amended petition were administratively unexhausted and untimely, and thus should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. However, the court overruled DADS' contention that Lagunas failed to establish a prima facie case for the failure to hire/promote claim, and remanded that portion of the case for further proceedings.

Age DiscriminationFailure to PromoteRetaliationPlea to JurisdictionSovereign ImmunityTexas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA)Administrative ExhaustionPrima Facie CaseMcDonnell Douglas Burden-ShiftingDepartment Restructuring
References
48
Showing 1-10 of 11,249 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