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. 534152
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 02, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Maurice Blue

Claimant Maurice Blue sustained a right leg injury in 2016, leading to a workers' compensation claim for his right knee. His physician diagnosed a medial meniscus tear and chondromalacia patella, initially recommending a 50% schedule loss of use (SLU) but later limiting it to 10% based on the 2018 Workers' Compensation Guidelines for Determining Impairment. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) awarded 50% SLU, but the Workers' Compensation Board modified this to 10%, strictly applying a special consideration for chondromalacia patella and disregarding the meniscal tear. The Appellate Division found the Board's interpretation irrational, stating it leads to inequitable outcomes where greater injury results in lesser compensation. Consequently, the court modified the Board's decision, reversing the restrictive interpretation of the guidelines and remitting the matter for a proper assessment of the evidence.

Schedule Loss of UseKnee InjuryChondromalacia PatellaMeniscus TearMedical Impairment GuidelinesAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationEquity in CompensationRange of Motion DeficitsWorkers' Compensation Law
References
33
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 03565
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 02, 2022

Matter of Blue v. New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.

Claimant Maurice Blue sustained a work-related right leg injury in December 2016, with his claim for workers' compensation benefits established for a right knee injury including a medial meniscus tear and chondromalacia patella. His physician initially assessed a 50% schedule loss of use (SLU) based on range of motion deficits but, applying a special consideration in the 2018 Workers' Compensation Guidelines for chondromalacia patella, limited his opinion to 10% SLU. The Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) adopted this 10% SLU, reversing a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's (WCLJ) award of 50%. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found the WCB's interpretation of the guidelines irrational and inconsistent with the Workers' Compensation Law, as it resulted in claimants with more severe injuries receiving lesser compensation. The court reversed the WCB's decision regarding the preclusion of additional SLU for other knee impairments and remitted the matter for a proper assessment.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseKnee InjuryChondromalacia PatellaMeniscus TearMedical Impairment GuidelinesAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationEquitable ApplicationJudicial Precedent
References
35
Case No. 11-07-00019-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 2008

Abilene Independent School District v. James Marks

James Marks, an employee of Abilene Independent School District (AISD), sustained a left knee injury during employment. While a torn medial meniscus was accepted as compensable, AISD disputed that chondromalacia in Marks's left knee was also compensable. The Texas Workers' Compensation Commission's appeals panel found the chondromalacia to be compensable and assigned a 15% impairment rating. AISD sought judicial review, which affirmed the appeals panel's decision. On appeal, AISD challenged the trial court's judgment, primarily arguing the inadmissibility and unreliability of expert medical testimony linking the injury to chondromalacia. The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the expert testimony admissible and sufficient to support the causation and impairment rating findings.

Workers' CompensationKnee InjuryChondromalaciaCausationExpert TestimonyMedical ProbabilityImpairment RatingAggravation of Preexisting ConditionAppellate ReviewAbuse of Discretion
References
18
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Abilene Independent School District v. Marks

James Marks suffered a knee injury while employed by Abilene Independent School District (AISD). AISD disputed whether the on-the-job injury caused chondromalacia in Marks’s knee, contending it was a pre-existing condition, while Marks argued it was a compensable injury. The Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission's appeals panel found the chondromalacia compensable and assigned a 15% impairment rating, a decision affirmed by the trial court. AISD appealed, challenging the admissibility and reliability of Dr. Cooke's expert testimony on causation and the trial court's 15% impairment rating finding. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding Dr. Cooke's testimony was admissible and provided sufficient evidentiary support for the findings.

Knee InjuryChondromalaciaMedical CausationExpert Witness TestimonyEvidentiary ReliabilityImpairment RatingAppellate ReviewOrthopedic SurgeryTrial Court DiscretionTexas Labor Code
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 14, 1993

Claim of Patella v. Accettola

The claimant sustained an occupational disease, a finding affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The employer appealed this decision, arguing that the claimant's duties were not typical for a receptionist, and thus, her condition should not be considered an occupational disease. The court found no basis to reverse the Board's decisions and upheld the finding that the claimant's condition constituted an occupational disease. The decisions of the Workers' Compensation Board were affirmed without costs.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation BoardAppealsReceptionist DutiesEmployer AppealBoard Decision UpheldAffirmed DecisionWork-Related InjuryClaimant Rights
References
0
Case No. 2017-06-0413
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 07, 2017

Foriest, James v. UPS

James Foriest, a UPS employee, sought medical treatment and temporary disability benefits for a dislocated right knee patella sustained during a work break. The Court determined the injury occurred in the course and scope of his employment but found it did not primarily arise out of his employment. Despite a medical opinion linking the injury to his work, the Court noted that an injury from merely walking on level ground is generally not compensable without an additional employment hazard. Consequently, the Court denied Mr. Foriest's request for benefits, scheduling a further hearing.

Knee InjuryPatellar DislocationMedical BenefitsTemporary Disability BenefitsEmployment CausationCourse of EmploymentScope of EmploymentExpedited HearingDelivery Driver InjuryPersonal Comfort Doctrine
References
10
Case No. 2018-02-0219
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 05, 2018

Linnen, Carrie v. Country Club of Bristol

Ms. Carrie Linnen, an employee of Country Club of Bristol, suffered a left patella dislocation in 2014, leading to extensive treatment by Dr. John Testerman, including surgery. Despite this, she continued to experience significant pain and instability. After referring her for a second opinion and then declaring he had "nothing further to offer," Dr. Testerman's statements prompted Ms. Linnen to seek a new physician panel. The Court, finding Dr. Testerman unable and unwilling to treat her ongoing complaints, ruled in favor of Ms. Linnen, ordering Country Club of Bristol to provide her with a new panel of orthopedic surgeons.

Medical BenefitsPhysician PanelExpedited HearingPatella DislocationOrthopedic SurgeonsTreating PhysicianMedical Treatment DisputeMaximum Medical Improvement (MMI)Recurrent SymptomsWorkers' Compensation Claims
References
2
Case No. 2018-06-1247
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 11, 2018

Lindsay, Courtland v. Western Express

This expedited hearing order addresses Courtland Lindsay's request for temporary disability and medical benefits following an alleged work-related knee injury on June 18, 2018. Lindsay claimed the incident aggravated a pre-existing patella injury sustained during a non-work-related jogging accident. Western Express, the employer, opposed the request, presenting a medical opinion from neurosurgeon Dr. Joseph Wieck, who concluded that Lindsay's injuries stemmed from the prior jogging accident and not the work incident. The Court found that Lindsay failed to provide sufficient expert medical proof to establish a causal link between his injury and employment, as required by Tennessee law. Consequently, the request for benefits was denied, and the matter was set for a future status conference.

Workers' CompensationKnee InjuryPatella FractureTendon TearMedical CausationExpedited HearingBenefit DenialPre-existing ConditionJogging AccidentEmployment Injury
References
1
Case No. 2021-08-0660
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 02, 2022

Bracy, Mary v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Mary Bracy suffered a bilateral knee injury at work, for which Smith & Nephew accepted the claim and provided treatment. Her authorized physician, Dr. John Lochemes, eventually discharged her at maximum medical improvement, citing a breakdown in the doctor-patient relationship rather than a resolution of her medical condition, despite diagnostic findings of chondromalacia. Ms. Bracy sought further medical treatment and temporary disability benefits, which Smith & Nephew opposed due to her alleged non-compliance and Dr. Lochemes's discharge. The Court ruled that Ms. Bracy is likely to prevail on her claim for additional medical treatment, ordering Smith & Nephew to provide a new panel of physicians, but denied her request for temporary disability benefits due to a lack of medical proof of disability.

Expedited HearingWorkers' Compensation ClaimsMedical BenefitsTemporary Disability BenefitsMaximum Medical Improvement (MMI)Doctor-Patient Relationship BreakdownEmployee Non-ComplianceBilateral Knee InjuryOrthopedic TreatmentChondromalacia
References
7
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 05264
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 01, 2020

Matter of Rickard v. Central New York Psychiatric Ctr.

Claimant James Rickard suffered a work-related injury to his left knee while restraining a patient. An orthopedist determined he sustained a 17.5% schedule loss of use (SLU) of his left leg, specifically 7.5% for loss of extension and 10% for chondromalacia. The workers' compensation carrier sought credit for a prior 10% SLU award to the same left leg stemming from a 2015 hip injury. Both the Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed this credit, resulting in a 7.5% SLU award for the current injury. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, holding that prior SLU awards for the same body member should be credited against subsequent awards, as all impairments to separate parts of a member are encompassed by the overall SLU award for that member.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseLeft Leg InjuryPrior Injury CreditMaximum Medical ImprovementChondromalaciaKnee InjuryHip InjuryAppellate Division DecisionCredit Application
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 17 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