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 Pulos v. Asplundh Tree

Claimant, a tree trimmer, had an existing claim for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and later sought to include a cervical spine condition as an occupational disease. A workers' compensation law judge initially disallowed this amendment, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding the cervical condition was dormant and non-disabling, and that the claimant's work activities aggravated it. The employer appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's ruling, concluding there was substantial evidence to support the finding that the claimant's preexisting cervical condition was activated by the distinctive features of his employment.

Occupational DiseaseCervical Spine InjuryCarpal Tunnel SyndromePreexisting ConditionAggravation of InjuryWorkers' Compensation LawJudicial ReviewAppellate DecisionTree TrimmingWork Activities
References
3
Case No. 2016-08-1486
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 30, 2018

Nance, Amy v. JCSD Emergency Medical Group d/b/a Medic One Response

Ms. Nance, an emergency medical technician, injured her left upper extremity while moving a patient. After conservative treatment, she was diagnosed with cubital tunnel syndrome and later recommended for a cervical spine evaluation by Dr. Cole. Medic One denied the requested benefits, claiming misrepresentation and non-work-related activity. The Court found Ms. Nance likely to prevail for medical benefits, ordering Medic One to authorize a cervical spine evaluation and allow her to select a specialist. However, Ms. Nance was not found eligible for temporary disability benefits due to insufficient medical proof of disability.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsTemporary Disability BenefitsCubital Tunnel SyndromeCervical Spine EvaluationMedical MisrepresentationCausal ConnectionExpedited HearingPermanent ImpairmentTreating Physician
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Scuderi v. Mazzco Enterprises

Claimant, a union carpenter, filed a workers' compensation claim in 2010 for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, which was deemed an occupational disease with a disability onset of June 25, 2010. The workers’ compensation carrier for his last employer, Mazzco Enterprises, sought to apportion liability among claimant’s previous employers, including JD Consulting LLC. The Workers’ Compensation Board ultimately determined the disease was contracted on August 14, 1998, and assigned 45% of the liability to JD Consulting and its carrier. JD Consulting and its carrier appealed, contending that the Board's selection of the contraction date lacked substantial evidentiary support, as the claimant could not recall the onset of symptoms and his treating physician provided no definitive opinion on the matter. The Appellate Division concurred, reversing the Board's decision and remitting the case for further proceedings due to the insufficient evidence supporting the chosen date of contraction.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeApportionment of LiabilityEmployer LiabilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewReversalRemittalNew York Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2006

Claim of McKenzie v. UJA-FED

Claimant, employed in data entry, developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and sought workers' compensation benefits. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially dismissed the claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding the condition to be an occupational disease causally related to employment, based on agreement between the treating physician and an independent medical examiner, and the carrier's failure to request cross-examination. The carrier appealed, arguing the Board erred in its finding regarding cross-examination and mischaracterized medical evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that the carrier waived its right to cross-examination by not making a timely request and finding no basis to disturb the Board's assessment of the medical evidence.

Occupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeWorkers' CompensationMedical EvidenceCross-Examination WaiverAppellate ReviewCausationEmployment-Related InjuryMedical Expert TestimonyBoard Decision Appeal
References
6
Case No. 2016-02-0282
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 15, 2017

Moffitt, David v. Allied Metals Company

David Moffitt, a welder, filed a workers' compensation claim for lumbar and cervical injuries sustained on March 26, 2015. While the parties stipulated a compensable lumbar injury, the central dispute revolved around the causation of the cervical injury. The Court, presided over by Judge Brian K. Addington, ultimately ruled that Mr. Moffitt failed to prove the work-related causation of his cervical injury, citing a lack of early complaints and the more persuasive opinions of Drs. Duncan and Brasfield over Dr. Lorio. Consequently, Moffitt was awarded permanent partial disability and temporary total disability benefits solely for his lumbar injury, with attorney fees and costs also assessed, while benefits for the cervical injury were denied. The Court also made alternative findings for appellate review regarding the cervical injury.

Workers' CompensationLumbar InjuryCervical InjuryCausation DisputePermanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityMedical Opinion ConflictAuthorized Treating PhysicianSpinal StenosisDisc Herniation
References
3
Case No. Appeal No. 02A01-9606-CV-00147
Regular Panel Decision
May 20, 1997

Deborah Tuggle v. Shelby Co. Government

Deborah Tuggle, a certified nursing assistant, sought workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained while weighing a patient at Oakville Health Care Center. The trial court awarded her permanent partial disability, temporary total disability, and future medical expenses for cervical and lumbar strain and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Defendants appealed the judgment, arguing the injuries did not arise from employment or the award was excessive. The appellate court affirmed, finding substantial evidence supported the trial court's determination of permanent disability linked to the work accident and that the awarded damages were within judicial discretion.

Permanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCervical StrainLumbar StrainMedical Impairment RatingAppellate ReviewTrial Court DiscretionNursing AssistantWork-Related Injury
References
5
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. 2-07-151-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 2008

Gail Smith v. Dr. Alan Henson, D.C.

Gail Smith appealed a jury verdict against Dr. Alan Henson, D.C., concerning her negligence claim for alleged non-consensual cervical manipulation during treatment for work-related carpal tunnel syndrome and hip problems. Smith argued the trial court erred by excluding evidence related to workers' compensation and by making an improper comment on the evidence. The Court of Appeals for the Second District of Texas affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that Smith failed to preserve error on her complaints by not objecting to the trial court's instructions or comments during trial. A dissenting opinion by Justice Sue Walker argued that an objection to a trial court's ruling is not required to preserve error, stating that the appellate rules disavow the necessity of objecting to a trial court ruling.

NegligenceMedical MalpracticeChiropractic TreatmentWorkers' CompensationAppellate ProcedureError PreservationJury InstructionsImproper CommentCivil ProcedureTexas Law
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Doner v. Syracuse China Corp.

The claimant, a stamper at Syracuse China Corporation, suffered a left wrist injury on January 4, 1982, leading to a diagnosis of tendinitis and total disability. Initially, a hearing officer established causal relationship and awarded benefits. However, the employer later controverted the causal relationship of disability beyond February 10, 1982. An impartial orthopedic specialist, Dr. Louis Retz, examined the claimant and determined her condition, diagnosed as cervical dorsal outlet syndrome or plexitis, was directly related to the industrial accident. The employer's request for further medical testimony was denied, and the Workers' Compensation Board awarded further disability benefits. The employer appealed this decision, challenging Dr. Retz's qualifications and the denial of additional testimony. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, upholding its discretion in selecting an impartial specialist and denying further development of the record.

Workers' CompensationMedical EvidenceCausal RelationshipDisability BenefitsOrthopedic SurgeryTendinitisThoracic Outlet SyndromeImpartial SpecialistBoard DiscretionAppellate Review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Baytsayeva v. Shapiro

A plaintiff, a former medical assistant, sued defendants alleging severe physical and emotional injuries after being struck by their car in January 2008. Defendants moved for summary judgment, contending that the plaintiff had not sustained a 'serious injury' as defined by New York Insurance Law § 5102(d). The court reviewed extensive medical evidence, including reports from treating physicians (Drs. Miller, Neystat, and Kuhn) and defendants' experts (Drs. Fisher and Block), detailing diagnoses such as post-concussion syndrome, depression, PTSD, cervical and lumbar disc issues, and significant limitations in range of motion. Finding that the plaintiff had presented sufficient prima facie objective and subjective evidence to establish serious injury under permanent loss, significant limitation, and 90/180-day claims, and that causation was adequately demonstrated, the court DENIED the defendants' motion for summary judgment.

Summary Judgment DeniedSerious InjuryNew York Insurance LawAutomobile AccidentPersonal InjuryTraumatic Brain InjuryPost-Concussion SyndromeDepressionChronic PainRange of Motion Limitation
References
38
Showing 1-10 of 672 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