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. ADJ8614160
Regular
Jun 10, 2014

VIKTOR CHERNYETSKY (Dec'd), SVETLANA CHERNYETSKY (Widow & Guardian ad litem), CAROLINA CHERNYETSKY (Daughter) vs. SLAVIC MISSIONARY CHURCH, INC., BROTHERHOOD MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, SOUTHLAND CLAIMS SERVICE, INC.

Defendant Slavic Missionary Church, Inc. sought removal of this workers' compensation case, arguing the WCJ erred in setting trial. However, the trial has already occurred and the matter has been submitted for decision. Consequently, the Board found the Petition for Removal to be moot. The defendant retains the right to file a petition for reconsideration if an adverse decision is issued.

Petition for Removalmootdismissedtrial datereconsiderationLabor Code 5900EAMSWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardSLAVIC MISSIONARY CHURCHBROTHERHOOD MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
References
0
Case No. E2005-00541-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 23, 2006

Angela McDaniel v. Carolina National Transport

This appeal arises from a vehicular accident where the issues were the admissibility of deposition testimony and the sufficiency of the jury verdict. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment. It found no abuse of discretion in allowing deposition testimony of a defendant under Tenn. R. Civ. P. 32.01, specifically invoking the 'rule of completeness'. Furthermore, the court determined there was material evidence to support the $200,000 jury verdict awarded to Angela McDaniel for injuries sustained, including a cervical strain and chronic pain syndrome, ruling that the amount was within the range of reasonableness. Costs on appeal were assessed to the appellants.

vehicular accidentdeposition testimonyjury verdictmaterial evidenceabuse of discretioncivil procedureappellate reviewpersonal injurycervical strainchronic pain
References
14
Case No. 2015-01-0208
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 26, 2016

Phillips, Julian v. Carolina Construction Solutions, et al.

In this interlocutory appeal, the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed a trial court's order denying an employee's request for medical and temporary disability benefits without an in-person evidentiary hearing. The trial court found the employee, Julian Phillips, failed to meet his burden of proof due to contradictory statements regarding a purported November 2014 work injury involving a vibrating drill. Despite subsequent medical opinions attempting to link cervical injuries to this incident, and an earlier conflicting opinion, a utilization review denied recommended surgery. The Appeals Board concluded that the evidence did not preponderate against the trial court's finding that Phillips was unlikely to prove the work-related accident.

Interlocutory AppealMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityPre-existing ConditionAggravated InjuryBurden of ProofContradictory Medical HistoryCervical FusionUtilization Review DenialMaximum Medical Improvement
References
5
Case No. 2015-01-0208
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 13, 2016

Phillips, Julian V. Carolina Construction Solutions

The case involves Julian Phillips, who sought medical and temporary disability benefits for a cervical injury allegedly sustained on November 21, 2014, while operating vibrating machinery for Carolina Construction Solutions (CCS). CCS disputed the claim, citing inconsistencies in Mr. Phillips' reporting of the injury and its relation to a prior low-back injury. A key issue was Dr. Eck's recommendation for cervical surgery, which was subsequently denied by Dr. Kimberly D. Terry during a utilization review, a decision that went unchallenged. The Court found Mr. Phillips failed to prove a likelihood of prevailing on the merits, primarily due to his contradictory statements regarding the injury's occurrence and causation. Consequently, the Court denied Mr. Phillips' request for medical and temporary disability benefits.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityExpedited HearingCervical InjuryPre-existing ConditionCausationMedical EvidenceUtilization ReviewInconsistent Statements
References
4
Case No. ADJ8620182
Regular
Jul 28, 2016

ANSON CARTER vs. CAROLINA HURRICANES, LOS ANGELES KINGS, CHUBB INSURANCE

The Appeals Board denied Chubb Insurance's Petition for Removal on behalf of the Carolina Hurricanes and Los Angeles Kings. The Board found that the Kings failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm despite concerns about discovery and the completeness of the medical record. Because the teams had a shared defense agreement, the Kings had access to the master claims file. Any remaining arguments regarding the medical record can be addressed at trial.

Petition for RemovalDue ProcessDiscoveryQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Medical-Legal EvaluatorPrimary Treating PhysicianShared Defense Consent AgreementCumulative TraumaMaster FileClaims Information
References
0
Case No. ADJ8266758
Regular
Sep 24, 2015

CAROLINA HERNANDEZ vs. SUPER GROCERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION for PATRIOT RISK/ULLICO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's award to applicant Carolina Hernandez. Defendant CIGA contended the WCJ erred in finding an industrial injury, asserting applicant was the initial aggressor in an altercation and that the injury was not reported until after her termination notice. The Board determined that video evidence, Exhibit E, is crucial to resolving the initial aggressor issue and ordered defendant to provide it. Reconsideration was granted to review this evidence and ensure a just decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Insurance Guarantee AssociationUllicoSuperior GrocersPetition for ReconsiderationInitial Physical AggressorIndustrial InjuryTerminationExhibit EWCJ Report
References
0
Case No. ADJ8270854
Regular
Mar 05, 2020

CAROLINA GARCIA vs. SUPERIOR GROCERS, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, INTERCARE INS. CO., PATRIOT RISK, ULLICO INS. CO.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Carolina Garcia's petition for reconsideration as untimely. The petition was filed on January 21, 2020, which was more than 25 days after the WCJ's November 13, 2019 decision. California law requires petitions for reconsideration to be filed within 25 days of service, and the Appeals Board lacks jurisdiction to consider untimely petitions. If timely, the petition would have been denied on the merits based on the WCJ's report.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingJurisdictional Time LimitWCJ DecisionMailing Date vs. Filing DateCalifornia Labor CodeCalifornia Code of RegulationsAdministrative Law JudgeLiquidation
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lara v. City of New York

Plaintiffs Carolina Lara and her father Marino Lara sued the City of New York and its contractor Graham-Windham for negligent foster care, alleging Carolina was sexually abused while placed by Graham-Windham. The City moved for summary judgment, asserting statutory immunity under Social Services Law 419, common-law immunity for discretionary acts, and non-compliance with General Municipal Law 50-h due to Carolina's failure to appear for a comptroller's examination. Graham-Windham also moved for summary judgment based on statutory immunity. The court granted the City's motion for summary judgment, finding it immune from liability due to both statutory and common-law protections and Carolina's non-compliance. However, Graham-Windham's motion for summary judgment was denied, as questions of fact remained regarding whether its actions constituted gross negligence or a lack of good faith, particularly concerning Carolina's sleeping arrangements and living conditions.

Child Protective ServicesFoster Care NegligenceStatutory ImmunitySummary JudgmentGross NegligenceWillful MisconductGovernmental ImmunityQualified ImmunityChild AbuseSexual Abuse
References
17
Case No. E2016-02254-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2017

In Re The Estate of Jimmy L. Smith

This appeal concerns the estate of Jimmy L. Smith, who died without a will. Debbie Burns, claiming to be his common law wife, was initially appointed as personal representative. However, the decedent's sister, Cora Davis, challenged this appointment, asserting that Burns was not legally married to Smith. Although a South Carolina court issued a declaratory judgment recognizing Burns as the common law spouse, the Monroe County Probate Court declined to accept this ruling due to the untimeliness of the South Carolina action and a lack of clear and convincing evidence under specific South Carolina statutes. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Probate Court's decision, concluding that Ms. Burns failed to meet the statutory requirements to be recognized as a surviving spouse, despite the South Carolina judgment.

Estate LawCommon Law MarriageProbate LawFull Faith and Credit ClauseSurviving SpouseIntestacyAppellate ReviewBurden of ProofSouth Carolina LawTennessee Law
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Eadie v. Complete Co., Inc.

Christopher A. Eadie was injured in a motor vehicle accident in 1997 while working for Complete Company, Inc. He subsequently filed workers' compensation claims in South Carolina, Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee. Complete and its insurer, Westfield Insurance Companies, moved for summary judgment in Tennessee, arguing Eadie was precluded by the election of remedies doctrine. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding Eadie's active pursuit of his claim in South Carolina constituted a binding election of remedies, barring his Tennessee claim. The Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel reversed this finding, but the Tennessee Supreme Court granted review and affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that Eadie's actions in South Carolina were sufficient affirmative acts to constitute a binding election of remedies.

Workers' CompensationElection of RemediesInterstate ClaimSummary JudgmentJurisdictionTennessee Supreme CourtSouth Carolina Workers' CompensationAffirmative ActForum ShoppingDouble Recovery
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 53 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