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. ADJ8550681
Regular
May 14, 2015

NANCY TOM vs. PARAMOUNT PICTURES

Applicant Nancy Tom sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award, arguing her 9% permanent disability rating was too low. She contended for further medical evaluation regarding worsening symptoms and a claimed 40% grip loss in her right hand, plus additional impairment ratings for her thumb and knee. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's reasoning that Dr. Angerman's conclusory deposition testimony regarding increased impairment lacked substantial medical evidence and conflicted with AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. The Board found that Applicant failed to meet her burden of proof for a higher disability rating.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardParamount PicturesPermissibly Self-InsuredPetition for ReconsiderationFindings of Fact and AwardExecutive AssistantIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityAgreed Medical EvaluatorOrthopedist
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Deshotel v. Berryhill

This case reviews an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision regarding a plaintiff's Social Security disability benefits claim. The ALJ had determined that the plaintiff suffered from severe impairments, including migraine headaches, anxiety, depression, hand numbness, and fibromyalgia, and had the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform sedentary work. However, the Court found that the ALJ erred by assessing the impact of the plaintiff's depression and anxiety on her RFC without the benefit of medical opinion evidence, thus rendering the administrative record incomplete. Despite the Commissioner's argument that the impairments were minor, the Court emphasized that the ALJ's own finding of "severe" impairments necessitated further development of the record, including obtaining medical opinions. Consequently, the Court granted the plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings, denied the Commissioner's cross-motion, reversed the Commissioner's decision, and remanded the case for additional administrative proceedings to gather the necessary medical opinion evidence concerning the plaintiff's mental limitations.

Social Security ActDisability BenefitsAdministrative Law JudgeResidual Functional CapacityMedical Opinion EvidenceMental ImpairmentsDepressionAnxietyRemandSubstantial Evidence
References
12
Case No. ADJ10440533
Regular
Apr 20, 2020

SUMUDU JAYASURIYA vs. SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the original Findings and Award due to insufficient substantial evidence. The WCAB found that the chiropractor QME's reports did not adequately explain the basis for combining wrist range of motion impairment with grip strength impairment, particularly in relation to the AMA Guides. The case is returned to the WCJ for further development of the record, likely through an evaluation by an orthopedic hand specialist, to properly assess the applicant's permanent disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSan Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit DistrictSumudu JayasuriyaQualified Medical Examiner (QME)Dennis M. SosineD.C.left upper extremity injurypermanent partial disabilityrange of motiongrip strength
References
6
Case No. ADJ9777475
Regular
Feb 14, 2017

MOSES CASTILLO vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The WCAB granted reconsideration regarding a prior award of $73\%$ permanent disability for an applicant's industrial injuries. The Board found the WCJ erred by including a $2\%$ rating for sleep apnea, as Labor Code section 4660.1(c)(1) prohibits increases for sleep dysfunction arising from a compensable physical injury. Furthermore, the Board remanded for clarification on the $10\%$ right hand and wrist impairment rating, as the agreed medical evaluator may have improperly combined impairment components under the AMA Guides. Jurisdiction was deferred for a re-rating of permanent disability after these issues are resolved.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityLabor Code section 4660.1(c)(1)AMA GuidesAgreed Medical EvaluatorCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCumulative InjuryDate of Injury
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

the Claim of Brigandi v. Town & Country Linoleum & Carpet

This case involves an appeal by an employer and its compensation carrier against decisions made by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The decedent, a carpet layer, died from cardiac arrest during work, with an autopsy revealing underlying coronary atherosclerotic disease. His widow was awarded death benefits. The employer’s carrier sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8), asserting a preexisting permanent physical impairment. However, the Board determined that there was no evidence that the decedent’s heart condition hindered his job potential before his death, thus releasing the Special Disability Fund from liability and holding the compensation carrier responsible. The employer's subsequent application for reconsideration was denied by the Board, leading to these appeals. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decisions, concluding that the Board rationally found no proof that the decedent's heart disease impaired his job potential, a necessary condition for reimbursement under WCL § 15 (8) (d).

Special Disability FundPreexisting Permanent ImpairmentCardiac ArrestCoronary Atherosclerotic DiseaseDeath Benefits ClaimEmployer ReimbursementCarrier LiabilityBoard Decision ReviewAppellate AffirmationMedical Evidence Interpretation
References
2
Case No. CV-24-1858
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 11, 2026

Matter of Laboccetta v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc.

Claimant Vincent Laboccetta appealed two Workers' Compensation Board decisions regarding his bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. The Board had modified a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's ruling, concluding that the claimant sustained a 20% schedule loss of use (SLU) of each hand, rather than the 30% initially assessed. This determination was based on the medical opinion of Carl Weiss, an orthopedic consultant, who applied the 2018 New York Workers' Compensation Guidelines for Determining Impairment. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decisions, finding that the Board properly credited Weiss's opinion as it was consistent with the impairment guidelines and supported by substantial evidence. The court also found no abuse of discretion in the Board's denial of the claimant's application for reconsideration.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseBilateral Carpal Tunnel SyndromeMaximum Medical ImprovementOrthopedic SurgeryMedical Expert OpinionImpairment GuidelinesWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Deck v. Dorr

This is a dissenting opinion concerning a Workers' Compensation Board's amended decision regarding a schedule loss of use (SLU) award. The claimant had already received a 100% SLU award for the loss of four fingers on their right hand and was granted an additional 100% SLU for their right thumb. The dissenting judge, Aarons, J., argues that there was a lack of substantial medical evidence to support the additional award for the thumb, as the claimant's surgeon did not explain how the thumb injury was separate and distinct from the injury to the other four fingers, which resulted from a single incident. The dissent highlights that the New York State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment and Loss of Wage Earning Capacity specify that the loss of all fingers at proximal phalanges equates to 100% loss of use of the hand. Based on this, the dissenting judge would have reversed the portion of the amended decision granting the additional SLU for the thumb, although the final order stated the amended decision was affirmed.

schedule loss of useSLU awardright hand injurythumb amputationfinger amputationworkers' compensation boarddissenting opinionmedical evidencepermanent impairmentwage earning capacity
References
3
Case No. CV-23-1298
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Michael Garofalo

Michael Garofalo, a lineman, sustained a left hand crush injury in January 2020 while working for Verizon New York, Inc. His workers' compensation claim was established. Following a permanency evaluation, his treating physician, Brian J. Harley, assessed a 35% schedule loss of use (SLU) of the left hand, using the 2012 New York State Guidelines for Determining Impairment. An independent medical examiner, Thomas R. Haher, initially concurred but later revised his opinion to 50% SLU based on the 2018 Guidelines. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) adopted Harley's 35% SLU opinion, which the Workers' Compensation Board upheld. On appeal, the Appellate Division found that Harley improperly relied on the 2012 Guidelines instead of the applicable 2018 Guidelines, as the first medical evaluation occurred after January 1, 2018. The court determined that the Board's decision, relying on Harley's erroneous application of the guidelines, lacked substantial evidence. The decision was reversed, and the matter was remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for a new determination of the appropriate SLU percentage.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseLeft Hand InjuryMedical Guidelines2018 Impairment GuidelinesAppellate ReviewRemittalMedical Opinion ConflictTraumatic InjuryFractures
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Feliciano v. New York City Health & Hospitals Co.

Claimant sought workers' compensation benefits for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge ruled the left hand claim time-barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 28 and established August 28, 2006, as the disability date for the right hand. On appeal, the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the right hand's disability date but, on its own motion, set December 2003 as the disability date for the left hand, thereby confirming the left hand claim was untimely. The claimant appealed, arguing against two disability dates for a single claim. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported treating the hand injuries as discrete occupational diseases with separate disablement dates and upheld the time-bar for the left hand claim.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeTime-barred ClaimDate of DisablementBilateral InjuriesAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardJudicial ReviewStatute of Limitations
References
6
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
Showing 1-10 of 1,111 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