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

Claim of Dechick v. Auburn Correctional Facility

Claimant sustained a right knee injury in November 2002 while working as a maintenance assistant at Auburn Correctional Facility. Following surgery, he alleged a consequential aggravation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially established the claim for COPD, but the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed this decision, deeming the medical evidence insufficient to prove a causal link between the knee injury/surgery and the COPD. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, upholding that the Board was within its authority to reject speculative medical evidence, even in the absence of contradictory evidence in the record.

Workers' CompensationConsequential InjuryCOPDKnee InjuryMedical CausationSpeculative EvidenceAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionAffirmationSufficiency of Evidence
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Workers' Compensation Insurance Fund v. Lopez

Lucas Lopez, a sandblaster, developed Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and filed a workers' compensation claim. Initially denied by a hearing officer and an appeals panel, a jury later found his COPD was an occupational disease sustained during his employment. The Texas Workers’ Compensation Insurance Fund appealed, challenging the trial court's assessment of court costs and the admissibility and sufficiency of Lopez's scientific causation evidence. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment. It concluded that Lopez was the successful party, justifying the cost assessment, and found no abuse of discretion in admitting the expert testimony or in the legal sufficiency of the causation evidence linking Lopez's occupational dust exposure to his COPD.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCOPDSandblasting ExposureCausation EvidenceScientific ReliabilityExpert TestimonyAppellate ReviewJury VerdictCourt Costs
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Stafford v. Barnhart

This Memorandum Order reviews the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of a Magistrate Judge in a Social Security disability benefits case. Plaintiff Joann Stafford challenged the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) denial of benefits, arguing the ALJ failed to properly apply the treating source rule regarding her chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and other conditions. The Court partially adopted the R&R concerning claims based on carpal tunnel syndrome but rejected it regarding disability claims due to COPD, finding the ALJ erred by not giving controlling weight to the treating physician's opinion. The Court determined that the ALJ's findings were not supported by substantial evidence regarding Plaintiff's COPD limitations. Consequently, the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Social Security DisabilityCOPDTreating Source RuleAdministrative Law Judge (ALJ)Residual Functional Capacity (RFC)Vocational Expert (VE)Carpal Tunnel SyndromeDisability Insurance Benefits (DIB)RemandSubstantial Evidence
References
19
Case No. 531185
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2021

Matter of Lewandowski v. Safeway Envtl. Corp.

Zdzislaw Lewandowski, a former World Trade Center cleanup worker, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that disallowed his claim for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Lewandowski sought benefits for various ailments, including depression, breathing problems, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and rhinitis. The Board had established his claims for GERD and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) but maintained the disallowance for COPD due to insufficient evidence of a causal relationship. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision regarding the disallowance of the COPD claim, finding it supported by substantial evidence. However, the court reversed the Board's denial to revisit Lewandowski's date of disablement and average weekly wage, remitting the matter for consideration of the date most beneficial to the claimant under Workers' Compensation Law § 164, and for further proceedings consistent with its decision.

World Trade Center cleanupChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseGERDPTSDAgoraphobiaPanic DisorderCausationMedical EvidenceDate of DisablementAverage Weekly Wage
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Kuczynski v. Trinity Foundry

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision concerning the apportionment of liability for a claimant's chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The claimant, who had worked at various foundries including Kennedy Valve (under ITT Grinnell and later McWane Inc.) and Trinity Foundry, filed a claim after a COPD diagnosis in 2004. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially established the claim and found Kennedy Valve/McWane liable. The Board subsequently apportioned liability among ITT Grinnell (71%), Trinity (28%), and Kennedy Valve/McWane (1%). Trinity and its workers’ compensation carrier appealed this apportionment. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that the claimant contracted COPD prior to his 1994 employment with Kennedy Valve/McWane, thus justifying the apportionment of liability among the employers.

chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseCOPDworkers' compensationoccupational diseaseapportionmentfoundry workemployer liabilitymedical expert testimonyappellate reviewliability distribution
References
4
Case No. 2019-08-0120
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 27, 2019

Hardy, Tracy v. Hershey Co.

Tracie Hardy, an employee, sought medical and temporary disability benefits for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) allegedly resulting from her employment at Hershey Co. This was her second claim for the condition, as a previous claim in 2017 was settled as doubtful and disputed for $6,000, based on a pulmonologist's opinion that her COPD was not primarily work-related. The Court held an Expedited Hearing and denied her current request for benefits. The denial was based on the doctrines of accord and satisfaction, finding the prior settlement legally resolved the claim, and res judicata, concluding the same claim had been fully litigated and resolved previously. The Court determined Ms. Hardy was not likely to prevail at trial.

COPDAsthmaOccupational DiseaseChemical ExposureMold ExposureAsbestos ExposurePrior SettlementAccord and SatisfactionRes JudicataClaim Preclusion
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

MERIDIETH v. Chao

Plaintiff Kyle Meridieth sought judicial review of the Department of Labor's decision denying him full benefits under the Energy Employee's Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) for asbestosis. The core dispute centered on whether his state workers' compensation settlement, which mentioned "any non-malignant respiratory injury" in addition to asbestos-related lung disease, should exempt him from coordination of benefits. The court applied an "arbitrary and capricious" standard of review to the Department of Labor's administrative decision. It affirmed the Labor Department's finding that Meridieth had not sufficiently proven his state settlement covered a non-covered illness, specifically COPD, that arose from the same work-related incident as his asbestosis, noting evidence linked his COPD to smoking. Consequently, the court denied Meridieth's brief, upholding the coordination of benefits and the judgment in favor of the defendants.

Energy Employee's Occupational IllnessAsbestosisChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseBenefit CoordinationWorkers' Compensation SettlementTort Suit SettlementAdministrative ReviewArbitrary and Capricious StandardAsbestos ExposureToxic Substance Exposure
References
4
Case No. 533623
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 29, 2022

Matter of Vaughan v. Heritage Air Sys., Inc.

Claimant Georgina M. Vaughan sought workers' compensation death benefits for her deceased spouse, a former sheet metal worker who died from cardiopulmonary arrest due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). An autopsy by Dr. Evgeny Olenko concluded his death was due to COPD following prolonged exposure to construction dusts and noxious gases during his employment with Heritage Air Systems, Inc., an opinion corroborated by the carrier's medical expert, Dr. Carl Friedman. The Workers' Compensation Board granted the claim, establishing a causal relationship between his employment and death. The employer and its carrier appealed, challenging the Board's reliance on the decedent's statements and the sufficiency of medical evidence. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding the decedent's statements properly corroborated and substantial evidence supporting the causal link.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsCausationOccupational ExposureCOPDSheet Metal WorkerCorroborationMedical EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceAppellate Review
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Trego v. United States Department of Labor

Larry W. Trego, a former employee of Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, was diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and received compensation under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. He subsequently filed a claim for wage-loss benefits, which the Labor Department's Final Adjudication Board (FAB) denied. Trego challenged this denial in a motion for judgment, arguing that the FAB's decision was arbitrary and capricious, specifically citing issues with evidence weighing and a misapplication of eligibility presumptions. The Court, applying a highly deferential arbitrary and capricious standard of review, found that Trego's 1997 layoff was due to a reduction in force, not his COPD. The Court affirmed that the Act compensates for a loss of actual wages rather than a loss of earning capacity. Consequently, the Court denied Trego's motion for judgment, upholding the Labor Department's denial of wage-loss benefits.

Federal CourtWage-Loss ClaimChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseEnergy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program ActAdministrative ReviewArbitrary and Capricious StandardOccupational IllnessCausationReduction in ForceStatutory Interpretation
References
2
Case No. 533623
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 29, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Georgina M. Vaughan

Georgina M. Vaughan filed a claim for workers' compensation death benefits after her spouse, Kenneth Vaughan, died from cardiopulmonary arrest due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in 2017. Mr. Vaughan had worked as a sheet metal worker for Heritage Air Systems, Inc. from 1997-1998. Medical evidence, including an autopsy report by Dr. Evgeny Olenko and an independent medical examination by Dr. Carl Friedman, concluded that Mr. Vaughan's COPD and subsequent death were causally related to prolonged occupational exposure to construction-related dusts and noxious gases during his employment. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and a majority of the Workers' Compensation Board panel affirmed the finding of a causally related death, crediting the claimant's testimony about the decedent's statements and the expert medical opinions. The Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the conclusion that the decedent's death was causally related to his employment and that the decedent's declarations were properly corroborated.

Death BenefitsCOPDOccupational ExposureSheet Metal WorkerCausationSubstantial EvidenceDeclarations of Deceased EmployeeCorroborationMedical Expert OpinionAppellate Review
References
14
Showing 1-10 of 26 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