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. M2020-00964-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 02, 2021

Guidesoft, Inc. D/B/A Knowledge Services v. State Protest Committee, State of Tennessee

Knowledge Services challenged the award of a statewide contract to Covendis, protesting the Central Procurement Office's (CPO) dismissal of its bid due to an insufficient protest bond. The CPO, and subsequently the State Protest Committee, determined that Knowledge Services failed to submit the correct bond amount, calculated as 5% of the State's estimated maximum liability of $190,000,000 under Tenn. Code Ann. § 12-3-514(d)(2). The Chancery Court for Davidson County upheld this decision, emphasizing the statute's intent to protect the State's exposure and limiting judicial review to the record. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Trial Court's judgment, concluding that the CPO correctly applied the protest bond statute and that the Trial Court did not abuse its discretion in denying additional evidence.

Bid protestGovernment contractsState procurementProtest bondStatutory interpretationAdministrative lawCommon law writ of certiorariJudicial reviewAbuse of discretionLegislative intent
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 01, 1989

Claim of Kass v. Club Mart of America, Inc.

The Workers' Compensation Board directed the Special Disability Fund to pay benefits for a claimant's back and knee injury, acknowledging preexisting hypertension and diabetes. The employer's carrier sought reimbursement from the Fund under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d). A legislative amendment in July 1987 eliminated the employer's knowledge requirement for reimbursement from the Fund, and the Board subsequently resolved that this amendment applied to all open cases where the knowledge issue was not finally determined by that date. The Fund appealed the Board's decision, contending the amendment should not apply retroactively to claims filed before its effective date, thus requiring proof of employer knowledge. The court affirmed the Board's decision, citing established law that amended statutes appropriately apply to pending proceedings without constitutional issues, given the employer knowledge issue was still unresolved.

Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d)Special Disability FundReimbursement ClaimPreexisting Physical ImpairmentEmployer Knowledge RequirementStatutory Amendment ApplicationRetroactive Application of LawPending ProceedingsAppellate ReviewPermanent Partial Disability
References
3
Case No. ADJ10232171
Regular
Apr 10, 2017

HERMAN O'BERRY vs. WORLD LEAGUE OF AMERICAN FOOTBALL aka NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE EUROPE (NFL EUROPE), ST. LOUIS RAMS, FAIRMONT PREMIER INSURANCE COMPANY (TIG)

This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for cumulative injury filed by a former professional football player against his former employers and their insurer. The primary issue was the statute of limitations, specifically the date of injury under Labor Code Section 5412, which is when the employee first suffered disability and knew or should have known it was work-related. The Board granted reconsideration to clarify this date, finding that the applicant's filing of his claim application on December 17, 2015, was the earliest documented evidence of his knowledge of the connection between his employment and his cumulative injury, establishing this as the date of injury. The employer's exemption from providing notice under Section 3600.5(e) did not alter this determination regarding the applicant's actual knowledge.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardNFL EuropeSt. Louis RamsLabor Code section 5405Labor Code section 5412cumulative injurydate of injurystatute of limitationspetition for reconsiderationApplication for Adjudication of Claim
References
16
Case No. ADJ10881718
Regular
Jul 19, 2019

WANDA JACKSON vs. CVS PHARMACY, INC., NEW HAMPSHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

This case, *Jackson v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.*, concerns the date of injury for a cumulative trauma claim under Labor Code section 5412. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant did not know her disability was work-related until receiving medical advice. The applicant's belief that her pain was caused by work activities was insufficient without knowledge that it constituted a compensable cumulative injury. Therefore, the date of injury was determined to be when she gained this medical knowledge, not when she first experienced symptoms or had a general belief about their origin.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code section 5412date of injurycumulative injuryoccupational diseasedisabilityknowledge of industrial origintemporary disabilitypermanent disability
References
2
Case No. ADJ4191064 (AHM 0091361) ADJ3063740 (AHM 0095797)
Regular
Jan 11, 2010

JOSE BARRIOS vs. McPEEK CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH, INC., GAB ROBINS, BROADSPIRE, California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA), Kemper Insurance, Pacific National Company, Cal Indemnity, CalComp Insurance, Pacific Auto Insurance Company

This case involves a workers' compensation claim for cumulative trauma injury to the applicant's neck, back, shoulders, and wrists. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the date of injury for this cumulative trauma claim. Based on established law regarding the "date of injury" for cumulative trauma, the Board determined that the period of compensable temporary disability commencing in August 2000 constituted sufficient knowledge and disability to establish the injury date. Consequently, liability for the claim, which involved multiple insurers now adjusted by CIGA, was assigned accordingly with a revised injury end date of August 3, 2000.

CIGAKemper InsurancePacific National Companyliquidationcovered claimscumulative traumadate of injurytemporary total disabilityLabor Code section 5500.5Rodarte
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 28, 2008

Aminzadeh v. Hyosung USA

The claimant, a machine operator, sustained a left hand injury in 2005. During treatment for this injury, she was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome in her left wrist. A separate claim for carpal tunnel syndrome was established as an unrelated occupational disease, with a disablement date of June 2007 by a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this decision. The employer’s workers’ compensation carrier appealed the Board’s ruling on the date of disablement. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that the selection of June 2007 as the date of disablement was supported by substantial evidence, as the condition was objectively diagnosed then.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeDate of DisablementSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewLeft Hand InjuryMachine OperatorMedical DiagnosisBoard Decision
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Woodall v. Hamlett

This workers’ compensation case involves an appeal filed by the administratrix ad litem of Bobby Lee Glass’s estate, challenging the trial court’s calculation of death benefits and interest commencement. Bobby Lee Glass was killed in 1990 during his employment with Van E. Hamlett, Inc. The trial court had set the commencement date for benefits and interest as February 24, 1992, the date an associated tort claim was dismissed. The appellant argued that benefits and interest should accrue from the employee's death date, as mandated by T.C.A. § 50-6-205(b)(2). The Tennessee Supreme Court agreed, clarifying that compensation payments should begin within 15 days of the employer's knowledge of death. The Court also addressed the application of a 6% penalty for unpaid installments, stating it should only be imposed if the employer acted in bad faith. The case was remanded to the trial court for further consideration regarding the penalty and to recalculate the commencement dates for benefits and interest consistent with the Court's opinion.

Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsInterest CalculationStatutory InterpretationInterlocutory AppealTort Claim DismissalPenalty for Unpaid BenefitsBad Faith DeterminationRemandTennessee LawCommencement Date of Benefits
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Milner v. Country Developers, Inc.

The Special Disability Fund appealed decisions by the Workmen’s Compensation Board which imposed liability on the Fund for a claimant's injuries. The Board found that the employer, Country Developers, continued to employ the claimant, a carpenter, with knowledge of his pre-existing permanent physical impairment, triggering liability under subdivision 8 of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The claimant suffered a fracture of the nose and a hip dislocation in 1964, having a history of three ruptured disc surgeries and other conditions. The appeal centered on whether the employer had sufficient knowledge of the claimant’s permanent condition. Testimony from the employer’s foreman, Mr. Pahlck, indicated awareness of the claimant's back issues, including wearing a back brace and being favored by co-workers. The court affirmed the Board’s decision, reiterating that employer knowledge is a question of fact for the Board, and its findings, if supported by substantial evidence, will not be disturbed.

Workers' Compensation LawSpecial Disability FundEmployer LiabilityPre-existing Permanent ImpairmentEmployer KnowledgeSubstantial EvidencePermanent Partial DisabilityFracture of NoseHip DislocationRuptured Discs
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cook v. Water Tunnel Contractors

A motion was filed seeking to compel the Workers’ Compensation Board to accept two notices of appeal, dated July 10, 1978, and September 22, 1978. The court partially granted the motion, directing the Workers’ Compensation Board to accept the notice of appeal dated July 10, 1978. However, the motion was denied with respect to the notice of appeal dated September 22, 1978. The decision was rendered without costs to either party. Justices Mahoney, Greenblott, Main, Mikoll, and Herlihy concurred with the ruling.

Motion PracticeAppellate ProcedureWorkers' CompensationJudicial ReviewAdministrative DecisionCourt OrderPartial GrantNotice of AppealLegal CostsConcurring Opinion
References
2
Case No. 15-36090
Regular Panel Decision

In re Covelli

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court granted the Debtors' motion to reopen their Chapter 7 bankruptcy case and imposed sanctions on creditor William Clement for violating the discharge injunction. Clement had pursued a deficiency judgment in state court on a discharged mortgage debt, despite previous court orders. The Court found Clement in contempt and ordered him to withdraw the state court proceeding, imposing a daily penalty for non-compliance. The Court denied Clement's separate motion to declare an earlier Chapter 13 petition date as the effective date for the Chapter 7 discharge, reaffirming the June 15, 2015 Chapter 7 petition date.

BankruptcyDischarge InjunctionSanctionsMotion to ReopenPetition DateDeficiency JudgmentContemptChapter 7Chapter 13Automatic Stay
References
82
Showing 1-10 of 3,151 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