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 La Fave v. St. Lawrence County

Claimant sustained a work-related back injury in October 1992. Years later, in November 1996, he was diagnosed with sciatica and a herniated disc, leading to surgery in March 1997. The Workers’ Compensation Board concluded that his back condition was causally related to the 1992 injury. The employer appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's finding, noting medical evidence supporting the causal relationship from the treating orthopedist and an independent medical examiner, despite the employer's consultant expressing doubts. The court also found no abuse of discretion by the Board in rejecting the employer's request for further record development due to untimeliness.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryCausal RelationshipMedical EvidenceIndependent Medical ExaminationBoard DecisionAppealAffirmationTimelinessRecord Development
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Adler v. Guild Electronics

The claimant appeals a Workers' Compensation Board decision from July 1, 1982, which found no causal relationship between the decedent's employment and his death from immunoblastic lymphoma. The claimant's expert testified to a direct link with toxic substance exposure at work, while the employer's expert and an impartial specialist found no such connection due to limited medical research. The Board resolved this factual dispute against the claimant, a decision supported by substantial evidence. The court, noting that the Board is responsible for weighing conflicting medical evidence, affirmed the Board's finding.

Workers' CompensationCausal RelationshipImmunoblastic LymphomaToxic ExposureMedical Expert OpinionFactual DisputeSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewDiseaseEmployment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Strauss v. Freiheit

A claimant appealed a decision by the Workmen’s Compensation Board from August 14, 1969, which found no causal relationship between the decedent’s work activities and his death. The decedent, an Assistant Manager and editorial writer, died on July 13, 1967, from an acute myocardial infarct after an emotional board meeting. He had a history of myocardial infarction. The board concluded that the stress of the meeting was not exceptional for a worker and thus, the myocardial infarction was not an accidental injury arising from employment. The court affirmed this decision, stating it was supported by substantial evidence, while a dissenting opinion argued for reversal based on more recent Court of Appeals rulings on compensable stress.

Workmen's CompensationCausal RelationshipMyocardial InfarctionWork-related StressAccidental InjuryEmotional StressBoard Decision AffirmationDissenting OpinionCardiac EventStrenuous Work Rule
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Stewart v. P & C Food Markets, Inc.

A claimant, who worked as a cashier, developed persistent leg and hip pain diagnosed as a slipped femoral epiphysis requiring surgery in August 1990. Following surgery, he allegedly developed chronic low back pain and filed for workers' compensation benefits. While surgeons opined that neither the slipped hip nor back pain were work-related, chiropractors testified otherwise. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled in the claimant's favor, finding a causal relationship for both conditions. The employer and its insurer appealed, raising an issue about the chiropractors' qualifications which was deemed not properly preserved. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence for the causal relationship.

Workers' CompensationCausal RelationshipSlipped Femoral EpiphysisBack PainChiropractor TestimonyMedical Expert QualificationSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewEmployer AppealInsurance Carrier
References
4
Case No. WCB No. G076 2707
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 09, 2021

Matter of Duncan v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

This Board Panel Decision concerns an appeal by the applicant, Joseph Lafayette, regarding a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's (WCLJ) finding on the causal relationship of his back injury. The applicant sustained injuries to his back, neck, and shoulder during his employment. The WCLJ had previously established a causal relationship for the neck and shoulder injuries but disallowed the claim for the back injury. Upon review, the Board Panel determined that the medical evidence in the record supports a causal relationship between the claimant's employment and his lower back injury. As a result, the Panel modified the WCLJ's decision to establish a causal relationship for the back injury, while affirming the other aspects of the original decision.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryNeck InjuryShoulder InjuryCausal RelationshipMedical EvidencePanel ReviewWCLJ DecisionModificationAppeal
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 07, 2000

Claim of Moreines v. Lawrence Nursing Care Center

Claimant, diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) by 1988, ceased employment in March 1995 due to her work environment exacerbating her condition. She filed a workers' compensation claim, but the Workers’ Compensation Board initially ruled against a causal relationship between her work and MS exacerbation. Following an appeal, the Board amended its decision, affirming the carrier's consultant found no causal link, whose credibility was maintained under cross-examination. The claimant appealed both decisions, arguing the consultant's report was equivocal and the Board should have accepted her expert's unequivocal testimony. The court affirmed the Board's decisions, finding the conflict in medical opinion was within the Board's province to resolve, and the carrier's consultant provided substantial evidence for the Board's finding of no causal link.

Workers' CompensationMultiple SclerosisCausalityMedical OpinionExpert TestimonyBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewDisease ExacerbationWork EnvironmentCredibility
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Panagiotatos v. Eastman Kodak Co.

This is an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision filed December 1, 1994, which ruled that the claimant had no further causally related disability subsequent to October 23, 1989. The claimant was injured in 1986 and received benefits until 1989, but sought additional compensation for persistent back pain. The Board dismissed the claim, finding insufficient credible evidence of causality. Conflicting medical testimonies from physicians Richard Dellaporta, Sewall Miller, and Harry Cole were presented. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, stating that resolving conflicts in medical testimony is within the Board's province and that substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion. The claimant's contention regarding the presumption of causal relationship under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (5) was also rejected, as countervailing substantial evidence was presented.

Workers' CompensationCausally Related DisabilityMedical TestimonyConflicting EvidenceAppellate ReviewPresumption of CausalityWorkers' Compensation Law § 21(5)Back Pain InjuryBoard Decision AffirmationExpert Witnesses
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 09, 2006

Claim of Atkinson v. Joseph Baldwin Construction

This is an appeal from decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed March 29, 2006, and May 9, 2006, which clarified an earlier Board decision from April 23, 2002. The claimant sustained a compensable right shoulder injury in July 1998. Subsequently, the claimant alleged problems with his left shoulder were causally related to the 1998 accident. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) initially found no causal relationship for the left shoulder injury, a determination affirmed by the Board in April 2002, although the Board's decision ambiguously mentioned developing the schedule of loss of use for 'both arms.' Following further proceedings, the WCLJ reiterated the disallowance of the left arm claim. The Board then clarified its 2002 decision in 2006, stating that it had affirmed the finding of no causal relationship for the left arm and that only the right arm's schedule loss of use was to be developed. The Appellate Division found that the Board's 2006 decisions effectively amended its 2002 decision. Upon review, the court affirmed the Board’s determination, finding substantial evidence supported the conclusion of no causal relationship for the left arm, giving deference to the Board's credibility assessments and resolution of conflicting medical evidence. The court also rejected the argument that the issue of a consequential left shoulder injury remained open, as the Board's prior decision had disallowed any causally related left arm condition.

Workers' Compensation LawCausal RelationshipLeft Shoulder InjuryRight Shoulder InjuryMedical EvidenceCredibility AssessmentAppellate ReviewBoard ClarificationAmended DecisionSchedule Loss of Use
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Franz v. Comet Construction Corp.

The case concerns an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding a claimant who suffered a left leg injury in 1962, leading to amputation in 1963. Subsequently, the claimant developed depression and psychotic episodes requiring ongoing psychiatric treatment. The Board initially made an award in 1964 and authorized further psychiatric care. The case was reopened in 1967 to determine the causal relationship between the accident and the claimant's mental condition. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found in 1972 that periods of hospitalization were causally related. Following additional hospitalizations, the case was reopened in 1979, where the appellants raised issues of apportionment and the standing of the Office of Mental Health of the State of New York. The ALJ affirmed the Office of Mental Health's standing and directed reimbursement, also ordering a trial on apportionment. The Board affirmed the ALJ's decision, concluding that the mental illness was precipitated by the injury, the 1972 decision was res judicata on causal relationship, and the Office of Mental Health was an interested party. The Appellate Court affirmed the Board's decision, rejecting the appellants' arguments regarding the Office of Mental Health's standing and their contention about the lack of medical evidence for the causal relationship of later hospitalizations, finding the Board's determination supported by substantial evidence.

AmputationPsychiatric InjuryCausal RelationshipRes JudicataStandingApportionmentMedical ExpensesSchedule LossMental HealthBoard Decision
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of McIver v. Mobil Oil Corp.

A claimant, employed by Mobil Oil Corporation, suffered a foot injury in 1975 that led to the development of a synovial sarcoma and subsequent amputation. The claimant filed for workers' compensation, but Mobil denied a causal connection between the injury and the cancer. After conflicting expert medical testimony and procedural disputes regarding expert witnesses and evidence, the Workers' Compensation Board concluded that a causal relationship existed. Mobil appealed this decision, raising concerns about due process and the removal of evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding no merit in Mobil's contentions.

Workers' CompensationCausal ConnectionSynovial SarcomaAmputationExpert Medical TestimonyDue ProcessImpartial SpecialistEvidentiary RulesCross-examinationBoard Decision
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 2,055 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