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
Apr 07, 1979

Claim of Lennon v. Kaiser

The Workers’ Compensation Board reversed a referee’s decision, determining that on January 24, 1975, the claimant was an employee of partners Ralph Kaiser and William Benson, and sustained injuries during employment. Testimony revealed conflicts regarding the claimant’s employment status and duties. Kaiser stated he never met the claimant until the day of the incident and instructed him to stay on the ground, yet admitted to an oral partnership with Benson and sharing profits. The claimant, conversely, testified both partners gave him directions, with Kaiser telling him to push shingles, and Benson having previously paid him. Despite the conflicting accounts, the board's finding of employment and injury was affirmed due to substantial evidence in the record.

Workers' CompensationEmployment RelationshipPartnershipAccidentInjurySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewConflicting TestimonyRoofing BusinessEmployee Status
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Korman v. Sachs

This case concerns an appeal challenging the invalidation of Lorraine Backal's designating petition for Judge of the Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County. The Supreme Court initially ruled her petition invalid, citing fewer than the required 5,000 signatures under Election Law § 6-136 (2) (b). On appeal, while the court upheld the factual finding of insufficient signatures, it deemed the 5,000-signature requirement for Bronx County unconstitutional. The court found this disparity, compared to 2,000 signatures for counties of similar population outside New York City, violated the Equal Protection Clause. Consequently, the judgment invalidating Backal's petition was reversed, and the Board of Elections was directed to place her name on the ballot.

Election LawDesignating PetitionsConstitutional LawEqual ProtectionBallot AccessSignature RequirementsJudicial ElectionsNew York StateAppellate ReviewSurrogate's Court
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Sundram v. City of Niagara Falls

The case involves a petitioner, an Indian national and permanent resident alien, whose application for a taxicab driver's license in Niagara Falls, New York, was denied due to a citizenship requirement in a city ordinance. The petitioner challenged this requirement, arguing it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Citing precedents like Yick Wo v. Hopkins and Truax v. Raich, the court affirmed that the Fourteenth Amendment extends protection to aliens regarding their right to earn a livelihood. The court found no compelling state interest to justify the citizenship classification for taxicab drivers, deeming the "undifferentiated fear" of criminal activity insufficient. Consequently, the court held subdivision (e) of section 16 of chapter 365 of the Niagara Falls ordinances unconstitutional, but withheld injunctive relief pending the full processing of the petitioner's application.

Citizenship RequirementEqual Protection ClauseFourteenth AmendmentAlien RightsTaxicab LicensingOrdinance ConstitutionalityOccupational LicensingDiscriminationRight to WorkNiagara Falls
References
14
Case No. VNO 0453567, VNO 0453569
Regular
Jan 23, 2008

GEORGE FORTNER, JR. vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board rescinded a prior decision that combined permanent disability ratings for two industrial injuries. This action was based on the recent en banc decision in *Benson v. The Permanente Medical Group*, which held that the *Wilkinson* rule for combining disabilities is generally no longer applicable due to new apportionment requirements. The case is returned to the trial level for the judge to revisit permanent disability ratings consistent with the *Benson* decision.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardGeorge Fortner Jr.County of Los AngelesPermissibly Self-InsuredVNO 0453567VNO 0453569Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardIndustrial InjuryLow Back
References
2
Case No. VNO 497801; VNO 497802 VNO 497803; VNO 497804
Regular
Feb 14, 2008

ANDREW LAVIGNE vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award and returned the case for further proceedings, requiring a new WCJ to reconsider permanent disability and apportionment based on *Benson v. The Permanente Medical Group*. The WCJ must determine which Permanent Disability Rating Schedule applies to each injury and may need to further develop the medical record to ensure substantial evidence supports any findings. The decision emphasizes that *Benson*'s rule on apportionment based on causation is now binding.

Appeals BoardReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentWilkinsonBensonPDRSAldiPendergrass
References
16
Case No. WCK 0069325
Regular
Jan 15, 2008

DAVID C. ERVIN vs. A. C. TRANSIT DISTRICT, GATES MCDONALD

This case concerns an injured worker who sustained industrial injuries to his right knee and low back across two separate periods. The Appeals Board rescinded the original decisions, finding that the WCJ must revisit permanent disability and apportionment calculations in light of the recent *Benson* en banc decision. The WCJ must now apply the *Benson* rule, which requires apportionment based on causation considering all potential disability contributors, not just industrial injuries.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPermanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS)Multiple Disabilities Table (MDT)WilkinsonBensonApportionmentCausationAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Industrial Injury
References
2
Case No. GRO 0032759, GRO 0032760, GRO 0032761
Regular
Jul 16, 2008

CALIFORNIA MEN'S COLONY vs. Legally Uninsured; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves an applicant's claim for permanent disability benefits arising from multiple injuries, including specific and cumulative trauma to the left knee and high blood pressure. The original decision apportioned liability for the knee injury per the *Wilkinson* standard, but the Appeals Board rescinded this due to new case law (*Benson*) requiring apportionment based solely on causation. The matter is returned for further proceedings to apply the *Benson* standard and potentially consider other relevant legal decisions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityApportionmentWilkinsonCumulative TraumaDiminished Earning CapacityLabor Code Section 4660Permanent Disability Rating ScheduleBoughner
References
5
Case No. MON 225200 MON 225201
Regular
Mar 05, 2008

ERMA LESTER vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA/BOARD OF EQUALIZATION; SCIF

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address the defendant's challenges to the original award, particularly concerning the application of the *Wilkinson* rule and apportionment of permanent disability. The Board rescinded the original decision, finding the *Wilkinson* rule is no longer generally applicable under *Benson* and requiring the WCJ to re-evaluate permanent disability and apportionment based on causation. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision consistent with *Benson*, addressing potential issues of apportionment between the two alleged injuries.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardFibromyalgiaTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityApportionmentWilkinson ruleBenson v. The Permanente Medical GroupLabor Code Section 4663
References
3
Case No. ADJ780465 (GOL 0087715), ADJ2934093 (GOL 0087450)
Regular
Sep 20, 2010

JAMES SHEARER vs. ECHTERNACHT CONSTRUCTION; CIGA by CAMBRIDGE for FREMONT COMEPNSATION, in liquidation

This case concerns an applicant seeking reconsideration of findings and awards for two industrial injuries in 1998 and 1999. The applicant argued the judge erred by requiring them to prove apportionment, and that two separate awards were inappropriate under *Benson*. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, finding the applicant had the burden to develop apportionment evidence post-*Benson*. The Board also affirmed separate awards are proper when medical evaluators can apportion disability, and that the applicant's claims of total disability were not supported by substantial medical evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardsApplicantDefendantIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityApportionmentBurden of ProofBenson v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
6
Case No. ADJ800932 (OAK 0299866) ADJ2725270 (OAK 0299867) ADJ635812 (OAK 0299868) ADJ4541817 (OAK 0308810)
Regular
Feb 16, 2010

JOAN STEPP vs. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration, rescinded the previous award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The Board found the prior decision to be insufficient regarding apportionment of disability among multiple injuries as required by *Benson*. Additionally, the Board questioned the vocational expert's analysis for a finding of total permanent disability, as it did not adequately address retraining feasibility per *LeBoeuf*. The matter is remanded for the Agreed Medical Evaluator to provide clarified apportionment opinions and for a new decision consistent with *Benson* and *LeBoeuf*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuriesCumulative TraumaPermanent Total DisabilityApportionmentAgreed Medical EvaluatorBensonLeBoeufVocational Expert
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 5,198 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