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. ADJ4258585 (OXN 0130492) ADJ220258 (OXN 0130487)
Regular
Apr 17, 2018

ENRIQUE HERRERA vs. MAPLE LEAF FOODS, U.S. FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALEA NORTH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This notice informs parties that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) intends to admit its rating instructions and a disability rater's recommended permanent disability rating into evidence. The WCAB previously granted reconsideration for further study. Parties have seven days to object to the rating instructions or the recommended rating, with specific procedures for addressing objections. If no timely objection is filed, the matters will be submitted for decision thirty days after service.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPermanent Disability RatingDisability Evaluation UnitRating InstructionsRecommended Permanent Disability RatingJoint RatingReconsiderationObjectionRater Cross-ExaminationRebuttal Evidence
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lyublinsky v. Barnhart

A 73-year-old disabled plaintiff, who has received Social Security Disability (SSD) benefits since 1993, brought this action to review the Commissioner's final determination concerning his benefit rate calculation. The plaintiff argued that his benefit rate was improperly calculated, citing discrepancies in earnings records and claims of discrimination. The case has a lengthy procedural history, including multiple remands from the District Court due to issues like denial of a fair hearing and lack of legal representation. The Court conducted a de novo review of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) benefit calculations, utilizing the Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME) method, and found no mathematical errors. Ultimately, the plaintiff failed to present compelling evidence to disprove the SSA's records, which are considered conclusive after a statutory period. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, the complaint was dismissed, and the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision was affirmed.

Social Security DisabilityBenefit CalculationAIME MethodAdministrative Law JudgePro Se PlaintiffFederal Court ReviewEarnings RecordsBurden of ProofRemandJudgment on the Pleadings
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. Reagan

This consolidated appeal addresses whether permanent total disability can be awarded in Tennessee when an anatomical disability rating is below 16.7 percent. The Supreme Court reconciles conflicting panel decisions, specifically overruling Seiber v. Greenbrier Industries, Inc. The court holds that the limitations outlined in Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-241, which apply to permanent partial disability awards, do not extend to permanent total disability claims. The decision affirms the trial courts' judgments, allowing individuals like Vernon Ray Davis and Bessie Lou Rayfield to receive permanent total disability benefits despite having anatomical impairment ratings under 16.7 percent.

Permanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityWorkers' Compensation ActAnatomical Impairment RatingStatutory InterpretationTennessee LawConsolidated AppealVocational DisabilityEmployee RetentionLegislative Intent
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 14, 1999

Claim of Williams v. New York State Department of Transportation

The claimant, who suffered a work-related injury in 1988, initially received permanent partial disability benefits at a mild rate in May 1996. Dissatisfied with this assessment, the claimant appealed, presenting medical evidence suggesting a more severe disability. This led the Workers’ Compensation Board to restore the case to the trial calendar for further development of the record concerning the degree of disability post-May 6, 1996. Although two physicians testified, with one indicating a moderate disability and another a total disability, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) ultimately awarded benefits at a moderate partial disability rate. Upon the claimant's subsequent appeal, the Board ruled that the claimant was precluded from raising the issue of their degree of disability, citing regulatory provisions. The appellate court found that the Board had abused its discretion, as the issue was explicitly remanded by the Board previously, and the claimant was still aggrieved by the WCLJ's award despite an increase in benefits. Consequently, the court reversed the Board's decision and remitted the matter for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationDisability AssessmentAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionProcedural ErrorMedical EvidenceDegree of DisabilityRemittalNew York LawAdministrative Appeal
References
0
Case No. 2015-01-0199
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 10, 2016

Tolbert, Christoper v. MPW Industrial Services at Volkswagen

This Expedited Hearing Order addresses Christopher Wade Tolbert's request for additional temporary disability benefits following a work-related injury to his head, neck, and back on June 29, 2015, while employed by MPW Industrial Services at Volkswagen. The central issues were Mr. Tolbert's entitlement to benefits and the correct weekly compensation rate. The Court found Mr. Tolbert was entitled to temporary total disability benefits from June 30, 2015, to July 9, 2015, and temporary partial disability benefits from July 10, 2015, to August 3, 2015, due to the employer's failure to provide accommodated work. Furthermore, he was awarded an additional $7.93 per week from August 4, 2015, to October 14, 2015, to correct an underpayment, and temporary partial disability benefits from November 11, 2015, onwards, based on ongoing medical restrictions from Dr. Stephen Dreskin. The Court established his correct weekly compensation rate as $261.28.

Workers' CompensationTemporary Disability BenefitsExpedited HearingWage StatementCompensation RateMedical TreatmentModified DutyEmployer AccommodationPain ManagementNeck Injury
References
7
Case No. 2015-01-0149
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 04, 2016

Ringer, Lamar v. Welding Ceramics, Inc.

Lamar Ringer, a press operator, injured his neck, left shoulder, and arm at Welding Ceramics, Inc. on November 19, 2014. He sought treatment, including from orthopedic surgeon Dr. Jay E. Jolley, II, who diagnosed a large C5/C6 disc herniation and recommended surgery, which Ringer declined. Dr. Jolley rated Ringer's impairment at 6% to the whole body and released him to regular duty, but Ringer experienced increased pain upon returning to work. Another physician, Dr. Jerry L. Smith, rated Ringer's impairment at 10% and placed permanent restrictions. The court found Dr. Jolley's impairment rating methodology incorrect due to documented radicular symptoms and accepted Dr. Smith's 10% rating, awarding permanent partial disability benefits. The court denied additional temporary disability benefits, finding Ringer reached maximum medical improvement, and also denied his request for a new treating physician panel.

Permanent Partial DisabilityImpairment RatingAMA Guides Sixth EditionRadiculopathyDisc HerniationAuthorized Treating PhysicianRebuttal of PresumptionTemporary Disability BenefitsChange of Physician PanelFunctional Capacity Evaluation
References
9
Case No. 2016-01-0035 / 67325-2014
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 07, 2017

Findley, Jack v. Volswagen Group of America, Inc.

This case involves an employee, Jack Keith Findley, who sustained a back injury while working for Volkswagen. He sought temporary and additional permanent partial disability benefits, leading to a dispute over his impairment rating, maximum medical improvement date, and the compensability of his condition. The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims sided with Mr. Findley, awarding him the requested disability benefits and future medical care under Dr. Jolley, based on Dr. Hodges' medical opinion regarding his work-related injury and functional limitations. The court also allowed Volkswagen to offset short-term disability payments.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Partial DisabilityMedical BenefitsImpairment RatingMaximum Medical ImprovementVoluntary ResignationMedical Opinion ConflictBack InjuryLumbar Disc Herniation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Linger v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.

Claimant sustained permanent partial disabilities from two 1977 accidents and one 1980 accident, leading to separate awards from different employers and their respective insurance carriers. Initially, the claimant received concurrent benefits exceeding the statutory maximum rate. Upon discovering these concurrent payments, a joint hearing was held. An Administrative Law Judge apportioned the award, which was subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board, stating that concurrent awards exceeding the statutory maximum for a permanent partial disability were impermissible. The claimant appealed this decision, arguing for a per-accident application of the statutory maximum. However, the appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, asserting that the Workers' Compensation Law establishes an overall maximum rate for permanent partial disability regardless of the number of accidents or employments.

Permanent Partial DisabilityConcurrent AwardsStatutory MaximumApportionmentMultiple AccidentsWage LossJudicial PrecedentAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation BoardInsurance Carriers
References
2
Case No. 2020-05-0417
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 05, 2021

Baldwin, Donald v. Evers Construction Co., Inc.

Donald Baldwin sustained a compensable left upper-extremity injury while working for Evers Construction Co., Inc. He sought increased permanent partial disability benefits, arguing his post-injury position at Evers did not provide overtime, leading to a lower average weekly wage compared to his pre-injury role. Evers countered that by statute, Mr. Baldwin was not entitled to increased benefits because his post-injury hourly rate of $21.00 exceeded his pre-injury rate of $17.35. The Court, relying on case law interpreting 'wages' as hourly rate of pay for hourly employees, denied Mr. Baldwin's claim for increased permanent partial disability benefits.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityWage InterpretationOvertime BenefitsHourly RatePost-injury EmploymentBenefit DenialTennessee LawStatutory InterpretationAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2001

Claim of Caiazza v. Eastman Kodak Co.

The claimant, a former machinist, developed skin cancer in 1990 and later lung and brain cancers in 2000, attributed to occupational exposure. Following his retirement in 2001, the employer conceded the lung and brain cancers were consequential to the initial skin cancer. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found the claimant permanently totally disabled and awarded weekly benefits of $300, based on the original skin cancer disablement date of February 27, 1986. The claimant sought Workers' Compensation Board review, arguing for an April 24, 2000 disablement date (diagnosis of lung/brain cancers) to receive higher benefits of $400/week. The Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision, citing the claimant's prior stipulation to modify the original claim for consequential injuries and established law that such awards are measured by rates at the time of the original injury. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding it was not unreasonable to rely on the claimant's agreement and that the award rate was supported by substantial evidence.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation BenefitsDate of DisablementBenefit Rate CalculationConsequential InjurySkin CancerLung CancerBrain CancerPermanent Total DisabilityAppellate Review
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 9,781 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