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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Hughes v. Indian Valley Industries, Inc.

In October 1996, the claimant sustained a work-related injury while lifting a 500-pound tarpaulin, leading to claims of left foot, leg, low back injuries, and nerve damage. Initially, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) recognized causal relationship only for the left foot injury, later amending the findings to include the back injury and left foot drop. The Workers’ Compensation Board subsequently rescinded the portion regarding the left foot drop for further medical evaluation but affirmed the causal relationship for the back injury and rejected the carrier's fraud allegations. The employer and its carrier appealed this Board decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s determination, noting that resolving conflicting expert medical testimony falls within the Board’s authority and concluding that the Board’s findings on the back injury and fraud issue were supported by substantial evidence.

CausationBack InjuryLeft Foot DropMedical EvidenceConflicting TestimonyWorkers' Compensation FraudPreexisting ConditionSubstantial Evidence ReviewAppellate AffirmationJudicial Review of Administrative Decision
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Jweid v. Vicks Lithograph & Printing

Claimant injured his back at work in February 1999, leading to multiple diagnoses and back surgeries. Following surgeries, he developed a consequential left foot drop injury. A workers' compensation claim was established and later amended to include the foot drop. Medical evidence supported a 40% loss of use of the left foot and a permanent partial disability of his back, with the claimant having reached maximum medical improvement. The Workers’ Compensation Law Judge made a schedule loss award for the 40% loss of use of the left foot, which the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed. The employer and carrier appealed, arguing against a schedule loss award. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence, as a schedule loss of use award is appropriate when there is no continuing need for medical treatment and the condition is stable.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseBack InjuryFoot DropMedical ImprovementPermanent Partial DisabilityAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionCausal Relationship
References
5
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00466
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 2023

Matter of Kennedy v. 3rd Track Constructors

Claimant Alastair Kennedy, an operating engineer, sustained work-related injuries in October 2019 after falling into a hole at a job site, filing for workers' compensation benefits for left shoulder, foot, and ankle injuries. The employer's carrier accepted the claim for foot and ankle but contested neck and left shoulder injuries, also raising a Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a violation. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and subsequently the Workers' Compensation Board found claimant's testimony regarding the accident and prior injuries not credible, denying the claims for neck and left shoulder injuries and imposing mandatory and discretionary penalties under Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's findings regarding the non-causal relation of neck and left shoulder injuries and the mandatory penalty for misrepresentations. However, the Court reversed the discretionary penalty of total disqualification from future wage loss benefits, deeming it disproportionate to the offense, modifying and affirming the Board's decision as so modified.

Workers' CompensationInjury ClaimCredibility AssessmentMisrepresentationWorkers' Compensation Law § 114-a ViolationMandatory PenaltyDiscretionary PenaltyWage Loss BenefitsCausal RelationshipMedical Evidence
References
16
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 25, 2004

Foote v. Lyonsdale Energy Limited Partnership

Glenn A. Foote, Jr., an employee, sustained injuries when a wood chip stacker collapsed at the Lyonsdale Cogeneration Facility. He and his wife filed a lawsuit alleging negligence and violations of Labor Law §§ 200, 240, and 241 against the facility owners (Lyonsdale Energy Limited Partnership and Moose River Energy, Inc.), the stacker designer (American Bin & Conveyor), and the procurer (Wolf & Associates). The Supreme Court partially granted summary judgment to Lyonsdale and Wolf, dismissing the Labor Law § 240(1) claim against Lyonsdale and the negligence claim against Wolf. On cross-appeals, the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that Labor Law § 240(1) was inapplicable as the injury resulted from the structure's collapse rather than the failure of a safety device. The court also upheld the dismissal of the negligence claim against Wolf due to the absence of a duty to the plaintiff, and found a question of fact existed regarding Lyonsdale's supervisory control, thus denying summary judgment to Lyonsdale on other claims.

Labor LawWorkplace InjurySummary JudgmentNegligenceElevated Work SiteScaffold LawWood Chip StackerDesign DefectSupervisory ControlContractual Obligation
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 27, 1979

In re the Claim of Jones v. John W. Cowper Co.

On April 26, 1973, the claimant sustained a work-related accident, with an initial employer's report specifying only a left foot injury. Four years later, on May 17, 1977, the claimant filed a compensation claim for injuries to his left ankle and back. While the original foot injury claim was not contested, the claim for the back injury was due to untimely notice. A referee initially allowed the foot injury claim but disallowed the back injury claim on March 5, 1979, due to lack of timely notice. The Workers’ Compensation Board, on December 27, 1979, modified this decision, finding that notice and causal connection for the back condition were established. However, the appellate court reversed the Board's decision, citing Workers’ Compensation Law § 28, which bars claims not filed within two years of the accident. The court concluded that the Board lacked the power to amend a claim after two years to include an unrelated condition. The matter was remitted to the board for further proceedings.

Timely NoticeClaim AmendmentStatute of LimitationsBack Injury ClaimWorkers' Compensation AppealBoard Decision ReversalRemittalWork-Related InjuryFoot InjuryJudicial Review
References
2
Case No. ADJ8411201
Regular
Feb 04, 2014

EMMETT MARSHALL vs. BREWER CORPORATION, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award finding industrial injury to the applicant's left foot and back, with temporary disability and future medical treatment. While affirming the injury to the left foot, the WCAB rescinded the finding of back injury. The temporary disability rate was also amended to reflect the statutory maximum of $1,074.64 per week, from the previously awarded $1,126.06. The decision otherwise affirmed the original findings.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPile DriverIndustrial InjuryLeft FootTemporary DisabilityMaximum Wage EarnerMedical TreatmentTallahassee Orthopedic ClinicWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 03, 1993

Claim of Berger v. New York Post

The claimant, a sales executive, sustained a compensable left foot injury in October 1987 for which he received a schedule award. His case was later reopened, but the Workers’ Compensation Board found no further causally related injury to his left foot or a causally related psychiatric disability, thus denying his application for benefits. The record presented conflicting medical testimony regarding the extent and cause of his infirmities. The court found that substantial evidence supported the Board's decision, given that some testimony established the injuries were not causally related to the work accident.

Workers' CompensationCausally Related DisabilityLeft Foot InjuryPsychiatric DisabilitySchedule AwardMedical TestimonySubstantial EvidenceAppealBenefits DeniedReopened Case
References
0
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 03430
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2022

Matter of Davenport v. District Attorney of Richmond County

Claimant suffered a work-related injury to her left foot and consequential deep vein thrombosis, establishing a workers' compensation claim. The Workers' Compensation Board denied a schedule loss of use (SLU) award for her left foot, adopting a Workers' Compensation Law Judge's (WCLJ) decision to close the record due to the claimant's failure to timely produce deposition transcripts. The Board's decision, which credited an orthopedic surgeon's opinion of 0% SLU over the treating physician's 20% SLU, was subsequently affirmed by the Appellate Division. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in closing the record or in the Board's resolution of conflicting medical opinions.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseLeft Foot InjuryDeep Vein ThrombosisMedical EvidenceDeposition TranscriptsRecord ClosureAppellate ReviewConflicting Medical OpinionsMaximum Medical Improvement
References
6
Case No. 533804
Regular Panel Decision
May 26, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Bernadette Davenport

Claimant Bernadette Davenport sustained a work-related injury to her left foot in 2013, leading to a workers' compensation claim and a consequential injury of deep vein thrombosis. Upon reaching maximum medical improvement, conflicting medical opinions arose regarding her schedule loss of use (SLU) of the left foot. The Workers' Compensation Board adopted the WCLJ's decision, which closed the record due to the claimant's failure to timely produce deposition transcripts and found no entitlement to an SLU award based on an orthopedic surgeon's opinion of 0% SLU. Claimant appealed this decision, but the Appellate Division affirmed the Board's findings, concluding there was no abuse of discretion in closing the record or in crediting the medical evidence relied upon by the Board.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseLeft Foot InjuryDeep Vein ThrombosisMedical OpinionRecord ClosureAppellate ReviewMaximum Medical ImprovementDeposition TranscriptsFactual Questions
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Claim of Donlin v. West Babylon Fire District

In October 1998, a volunteer firefighter claimant broke a metatarsal bone in his right foot, leading to subsequent left knee, lower back, and right knee problems. While the initial foot and left knee injuries were found to be causally related, the employer and its workers’ compensation carrier disputed the causal link of the back and right knee pain. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) determined that the claimant sustained a permanent partial disability, including consequential back and right knee injuries, resulting in a 75% or greater loss of earning capacity. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this determination. The carrier appealed the Board's decision, but the Appellate Division affirmed, citing sufficient expert medical testimony supporting the Board's decision and upholding the WCLJ’s denial of an adjournment for the carrier’s absent medical expert.

Volunteer Firefighters' Benefit LawWorkers' Compensation Board AppealPermanent Partial DisabilityLoss of Earning CapacityCausal RelationMedical Expert TestimonyAdjournment DenialWCLJ AuthorityAppellate ReviewSteamfitter Injury
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,192 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