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. OAK 0326623
Regular
Jan 22, 2008

HENRIETTA BARCLAY vs. RITE AID, TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY

The applicant's claim that the excision of her distal clavicle constitutes an "amputation" under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C) was denied, as the Board held that term refers to external body parts. However, the Board deferred the issue of temporary disability indemnity, allowing further proceedings on the applicant's claims of unreasonable medical treatment delays estopping the defendant from asserting the statutory limits. The Board also declined to rule on the constitutionality of the statute, citing lack of jurisdiction.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRite AidTravelers Insurance CompanyReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderSurgeryExcisionDistal ClavicleAmputation
References
2
Case No. LAO 0854553
Regular
Oct 01, 2007

DANIEL A. LONG vs. RYANS EXPRESS MOTORCOACH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant's temporary disability payments for a right shoulder injury terminated on February 28, 2007. The Board ruled that the surgical removal of a distal clavicle spur does not constitute an "amputation" under Labor Code Section 4656(c)(2), which requires severance of an external body part. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to extended temporary disability benefits beyond the statutory 104-week limit.

Distal clavicleAmputation exceptionSection 4656(c)(2)Temporary disability termination104-week limitation240-week limitationRight shoulder surgeryRotator cuff tearJacob Tauber M.D.Hawkins v. Amberwood Products
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 25, 2011

Alfonso v. Metropolitan Transit Authority

The plaintiff, a 52-year-old office worker, sustained a comminuted intraarticular fracture of the distal radial metaphysis of her right wrist and a cervical herniated disc after being struck by a truck owned by the Transit Authority. After a failed closed reduction, she underwent open reduction surgery with internal fixation and extensive physical therapy, resulting in reduced range of motion, continued pain, and progressive arthritis. A jury awarded the plaintiff $450,000 for past pain and suffering and $800,000 for future pain and suffering. The Supreme Court, New York County, affirmed this judgment, determining that the awards did not materially deviate from reasonable compensation.

personal injurymotor vehicle accidentfracturewrist injuryneck injuryshoulder injurypain and sufferingjury verdictaffirmationnegligence
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 01, 1984

Claim of Furner v. Precision

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding a claimant's eligibility for disability benefits following gastroplasty and bilateral distal salpingectomy. The employer and insurance carrier argued that the surgery for morbid obesity was purely elective, therefore disqualifying the claimant from benefits. However, the Board found, supported by medical reports from the surgeon and other evidence, that the award of disability benefits was warranted. The court affirmed this decision, concluding that the Board had substantial evidence to determine that the claimant's excessive obesity falls within the scope of "injury" and "sickness" as defined in Workers’ Compensation Law § 201 (8) and that the surgery constituted a medically prescribed course of treatment.

Morbid ObesityDisability BenefitsGastroplastyBilateral Distal SalpingectomyElective SurgeryMedical NecessitySubstantial EvidenceWorkers' Compensation Board AppealMedical ReportsSickness Definition
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Panzarella v. Multiple Parking Services, Inc.

The case involves a plaintiff who suffered injuries from a fall on an icy parking lot. The defendant appealed the judgment, arguing a lack of actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition and insufficient time to remedy it. However, the evidence showed the ice was visible and present for an adequate period for the defendant's employees to discover and rectify it, leading the court to conclude the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The Supreme Court also correctly refused a jury charge on implied assumption of risk as the plaintiff was unaware of the ice. Additionally, the jury's award of $160,000 for future pain and suffering was deemed reasonable given the plaintiff's fractured distal radius, two surgeries, permanent grip and pinch deficiencies, scars, atrophy, and wrist deformity.

Icy ConditionParking Lot FallPremises LiabilityConstructive NoticeJury VerdictAssumption of RiskPersonal Injury DamagesFractured WristSurgical ProceduresPermanent Injury
References
4
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 06434 [188 AD3d 1403]
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 12, 2020

Matter of Liuni v. Gander Mtn.

Claimant Joseph D. Liuni sustained a left distal bicep tendon rupture in 2007, resulting in a 22.5% schedule loss of use (SLU) award for his left arm. In 2014, he established a workers' compensation claim for his right shoulder, which was later amended in 2016 to include a consequential injury to his left shoulder. A physician determined a 27.5% SLU for the left arm due to the 2016 injury, which, when combined with the prior award, totaled an overall 50% SLU. The Workers' Compensation Board modified a WCLJ's determination, ruling that the bicep and shoulder injuries are not eligible for separate SLU awards as they both fall under awards for the left arm. Consequently, the Board deducted the 2007 22.5% SLU from the 2016 27.5% SLU, resulting in a 5% SLU award for the left arm. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing that Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (3) limits SLU awards to statutorily enumerated members and that separate awards for subparts of a body member would constitute an unauthorized monetary windfall.

Schedule Loss of Use (SLU)Workers' CompensationAppellate DivisionThird DepartmentLeft Arm InjuryBicep Tendon RuptureShoulder InjuryPrior Award DeductionMonetary WindfallStatutory Interpretation
References
5
Showing 1-6 of 6 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