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. ADJ9451959; ADJ9451967
Regular
Aug 22, 2019

MARK YANCHUNIS vs. SHASTA GOLD CORPORATION, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's (WCJ) decision. The WCJ properly relied on the agreed medical evaluator's (AME) opinion, which provided substantial evidence for the impairment rating. The AME's analysis, which accounted for severe degenerative changes and gait abnormalities beyond a strict AMA guide application, was deemed persuasive and within legal parameters. The Board affirmed that the AME's reasoning for adding impairments due to a synergistic effect, rather than combining them, was supported by case law and the medical evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMark YanchunisShasta Gold CorporationZurich American Insurance CompanyADJ9451959ADJ9451967Petition for ReconsiderationAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Almaraz/Guzman analysisAMA Guides
References
3
Case No. ADJ7662819
Regular
Apr 27, 2015

JEWELL McKEE vs. MARTEN'S TRANSPORT, LTD, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant alleging industrial injuries to various body parts, including psyche, hearing, and gait disorder, following a fall. The defendant sought reconsideration of the original award, primarily challenging the findings of psyche injury and gait disorder, as well as the award of temporary disability and a permanent disability increase. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, deferring the issues of gait disorder and all permanent disability findings due to insufficient medical evidence on gait causation and the improper piecemeal determination of permanent disability. The Board otherwise affirmed the findings of industrial injury to psyche, additional temporary disability, and ordered further medical evaluation by an AME or IME.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMarten's TransportACE American InsuranceIndustrial InjuryPsyche InjuryGait DisorderPermanent DisabilityLabor Code Section 4658(d)(2)Temporary DisabilityAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State v. James Z.

In June 2010, the petitioner commenced a proceeding under the Mental Hygiene Law to civilly manage the respondent, alleging he was a sex offender requiring confinement due to a mental abnormality. After a jury trial, the respondent was found to be a detained sex offender with a mental abnormality, and subsequently committed to a secure treatment facility with his consent. The respondent appealed, contending that the jury's finding was against the weight of the evidence and that Supreme Court erred by allowing testimony about misconduct from his presentence report and using a confusing verdict sheet. The appellate court affirmed the order, determining that the jury's verdict was supported by expert testimony from multiple psychologists and that there were no errors in the court's evidentiary or procedural decisions. The court deferred to the jury's credibility determinations regarding the competing expert opinions on respondent's mental abnormality.

Sex OffenderCivil CommitmentMental AbnormalityAntisocial Personality DisorderParaphiliaExpert TestimonyWeight of EvidencePresentence ReportVerdict SheetAppellate Review
References
12
Case No. 06 Civ. 0266; 06 Civ. 3461; 07 Civ. 3258
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 28, 2007

Abbatiello v. Monsanto Co.

This case involves consolidated actions brought by two groups of current and former employees and a group of landowners against General Electric Company (GE) and Monsanto Company (including Solutia, Inc., and Pharmacia Corporation). The plaintiffs allege various tort claims including negligence, breach of warranty, strict liability, fraud, emotional distress, abnormally dangerous activity, medical monitoring, fear of contracting illness, nuisance, and trespass, stemming from exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from a GE manufacturing facility in Schenectady, New York, where Monsanto supplied PCBs. The defendants moved to dismiss certain claims under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b). The court granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss, upholding claims such as abnormally dangerous activity, intentional infliction of emotional distress, nuisance, medical monitoring, fear of contracting illness, and, for GE, negligence, strict liability, and trespass, while dismissing claims like breach of warranty, fraud, and negligent infliction of emotional distress for various parties.

Toxic TortPCB ContaminationEnvironmental LitigationMotions to DismissStatute of LimitationsStrict LiabilityAbnormally Dangerous ActivityMedical MonitoringFear of IllnessNuisance
References
69
Case No. ADJ4337031 (SAC 0363533)
Regular
Aug 19, 2011

CHARLOTTE HUDSON vs. EMG CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision, rescinding the judge's award of 11% permanent disability. The case is returned to the trial level to further develop the medical record regarding the applicant's gait derangement impairment and its valuation under *Almaraz/Guzman* principles. The judge must also address the vocational expert's entitlement to fees and consider the recent *Ogilvie* decision's impact on permanent disability determination.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityVocational ExpertAgreed Medical ExaminerAlmaraz/GuzmanOgilvieGait DerangementAntalgic GaitAMA Guides 5th Edition
References
9
Case No. ADJ1973305 (STK 0199710)
Regular
Jan 30, 2009

Silviano De La Torre vs. PETE POSTMA DAIRY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The WCAB granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, returning the case for re-evaluation of permanent disability. The board found merit in the applicant's argument that gait derangement and cane use were not adequately considered in the original rating. However, the WCAB upheld the finding that the defendant failed to establish apportionment to a prior injury due to a lack of due diligence. The applicant's request to apply the 1997 rating schedule was deemed waived.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSilviano De La TorrePete Postma DairyState Compensation Insurance FundADJ1973305STK 0199710ReconsiderationFindings Award and OrdersWorkers' Compensation JudgeTemporary Disability
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 15, 1987

Kornfeld v. Nassau County Civil Service Commission

The petitioner appealed a judgment dismissing a CPLR article 78 proceeding. This proceeding sought to review a June 3, 1987 determination which found the petitioner unqualified for employment as a Nassau County police officer. The determination was based on a medical officer's recommendation, citing abnormal electrocardiogram configurations indicating potential risks under stressful conditions. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, found the determination neither arbitrary nor capricious, and that the petitioner's physician's contrary opinion was not controlling. The judgment to dismiss the proceeding was subsequently affirmed.

CPLR article 78Police Officer EmploymentMedical DisqualificationElectrocardiogramStress TestAppellate ReviewAffirmed JudgmentNassau CountyCivil Service LawJudicial Review
References
3
Case No. ADJ1142998
Regular
May 29, 2009

STEVE REYNOLDS vs. WYCKOFF LOGGING, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the original decision which denied the applicant's claim for avascular necrosis of the right hip as a compensable consequence of a prior industrial injury. The Board found the original decision was not supported by substantial medical evidence, specifically finding the reliance on Dr. Glancz's report to be erroneous and speculative. Dr. Barber's reports, however, were deemed substantial evidence supporting the applicant's claim that the fall and subsequent gait issues significantly impacted his right hip condition. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

Avascular necrosiscompensable consequenceindustrial injuryright hipleft lower extremitymedical treatmentQualified Medical Examiner (QME)substantial evidenceopinionreconsideration
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rosado v. Shalala

The plaintiff filed an application for disability insurance benefits due to a back injury. Despite opinions from treating physicians indicating total disability, an MRI and X-rays of the lumbar spine were negative. The government's physician also found the plaintiff walked normally with minimal physical abnormalities. The Administrative Law Judge deemed the plaintiff's pain testimony incredible and found him capable of light work. The court affirmed the Secretary's decision to deny benefits, concluding it was supported by substantial evidence, as workers' compensation standards differ from those for disability insurance benefits.

Social Security BenefitsDisability ClaimBack InjuryMedical EvidenceCredibility AssessmentAdministrative Law JudgeSubstantial EvidenceTreating Physician RuleLumbar SpineMRI Negative
References
8
Case No. 2015 NY Slip Op 02068 [126 AD3d 537]
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2015

Matter of State of New York Off. of Mental Health v. Dennis J.

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed an order committing Dennis J. to a secure treatment facility after findings of mental abnormality and dangerousness as a sex offender. The court upheld the Supreme Court's decision to permit an expert to testify about an email from a social worker treating Dennis J., rejecting arguments regarding HIPAA and due process as unpreserved or without merit. It found the expert testimony reliable and its probative value outweighed potential prejudice, with the jury properly instructed. The decision underscores the court's discretion in admitting expert testimony in civil commitment proceedings.

Mental Health LawSex OffenderCivil CommitmentExpert TestimonyHIPAADue ProcessAppellate ReviewMental AbnormalityDangerous Sex OffenderEvidentiary Rules
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 36 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