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 Wallace v. Oswego Wire, Inc.

The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed a decision finding a claimant's left hand injury consequentially related to a prior right knee injury. While recuperating from a work-related right knee injury, the claimant's knee gave out, causing him to cut his left hand with a table saw. The employer and its carrier appealed, arguing the claimant's conduct was an intervening act. The court, led by Peters, J., affirmed the Board’s determination, finding substantial evidence that using the table saw, despite the knee condition, was not an unreasonable intervening cause, as prior buckling was infrequent. Judges Crew III, Carpinello, Lahtinen, and Kane concurred with the decision.

Workers' CompensationConsequential InjuryIntervening CauseRight Knee InjuryLeft Hand InjuryTable Saw AccidentCausationAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionFactual Issue
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 03, 2004

Claim of Scally v. Ravena Coeymans Selkirk Central School District

In this case, a claimant appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding apportionment of her workers' compensation award. The claimant, who suffered a work-related left knee injury in 2002, had a pre-existing non-work-related injury to the same knee from 1986. While a WCLJ initially denied apportionment, the Board reversed, directing a 50/50 apportionment based on the premise that the prior injury would have resulted in a schedule loss of use award had it been work-related. The appellate court upheld the Board's determination, deferring to its interpretation that a non-work-related injury leading to a schedule loss of use constitutes a "disability in a compensation sense" for apportionment purposes. This decision was supported by medical expert testimony indicating a schedule loss of use from the prior surgery.

Workers' CompensationApportionmentKnee InjuryNon-work-related InjurySchedule Loss of UsePreexisting ConditionMedical Expert TestimonyBoard InterpretationJudicial ReviewAppellate Decision
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 01, 1978

Claim of Goss v. Hornblower & Weeks

Claimant, a stockbroker, sustained a compensable left knee injury in 1974, leading to surgery and a 10% schedule loss award. Subsequently, the claimant sought to have a right knee injury, sustained in 1975 after being struck by a bicycle while en route to a medical examination for his left knee, deemed a consequential injury. While the referee initially found the right knee injury compensable, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, concluding that the evidence did not establish a direct and natural link between the industrial left knee injury and the subsequent right knee injury. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, citing substantial evidence in the record to support the disallowance of the claim.

Workers' CompensationKnee InjuryConsequential InjurySchedule LossBoard ReversalAffirmationStockbrokerAccidentMedical ExaminationAppellate Review
References
1
Case No. ADJ3023725 (STK 0186210) ADJ 6853419
Regular
Mar 03, 2016

IGNACIO ROA vs. ROHRER BROTHERS/GENERAL PRODUCE; FREMONT COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, administered by SEDGWICK; XL SPECIALTY/BROADSPIRE; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns applicant Ignacio Roa's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award finding 20% permanent disability for a right knee injury with 50% apportionment to nonindustrial factors. Roa also sought to establish an industrial injury to his left knee as a consequence of the right knee injury and a cumulative trauma injury to both knees, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied. The Board affirmed the judge's findings, relying on Dr. Henrichsen's opinion that Roa's left knee symptoms were due to the natural progression of prior surgery and wear, not industrial factors. A dissenting opinion argued for further medical development, finding persuasive evidence of industrial contribution to the left knee condition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIgnacio RoaRohrer BrothersFremont Compensation Insurance CompanyCIGAXL SpecialtyState Compensation Insurance Fundpermanent disabilityapportionmentnonindustrial factors
References
5
Case No. ADJ1991870
Regular
Sep 07, 2010

TOM DRENNAN vs. SUPERIOR INSPECTION SERVICES, FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an employer's petition for reconsideration of a WCJ's award finding industrial injury to the applicant's left knee, both hips, and gastrointestinal system as consequential to an admitted right knee injury. The defendant argues that a prior 2005 WCJ decision denying consequential injury to the left knee and hips is res judicata. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, amending the award to remove the left knee and hip injuries, holding that the 2005 decision was final and the five-year time limit to reopen under Labor Code sections 5410 and 5804 had passed. The finding of consequential injury to the gastrointestinal system and 29% permanent disability remain affirmed.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardCompensable ConsequencesRes JudicataIndustrial InjuryLeft KneeHipsGastrointestinal SystemPermanent Disability
References
2
Case No. ADJ506368 (SRO 0132183)
Regular
Feb 04, 2014

Barbara Kangas vs. REDBUD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM WEST

The Appeals Board rescinded the prior award, finding no compensable consequence injury to the applicant's left knee. While the applicant had an existing award for future medical treatment for her right knee injury, the Agreed Medical Examiner's reports indicated no need for left knee treatment. Crucially, any left knee disability did not manifest within five years of the original injury, precluding a finding of new and further disability. Therefore, the petition to reopen for new and further disability was denied.

Compensable consequence injuryStatute of limitationsReconsiderationFindings Award & OrderAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)Petition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilityMedical treatment awardJurisdictionLabor Code § 4600
References
20
Case No. ADJ8336436
Regular
Mar 25, 2016

CARMEN NAVARRO vs. VENICE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION, ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

Here's a summary for a lawyer: The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied Carmen Navarro's petition for reconsideration. Navarro sought to establish her right knee injury as a compensable consequence of a prior admitted left knee injury. The WCJ's report, adopted by the WCAB, found the right knee injury to be non-industrial. Medical evidence, particularly from QME Dr. Williamson, indicated the right knee pain arose independently in August 2013, distinct from the earlier left knee injury and treatment period. The Board specifically rejected any consideration of "rashly undertaken" activity as irrelevant to the legal analysis.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardVenice Community Housing CorporationAthens AdministratorsADJ8336436Los Angeles District OfficeWCJcompensable consequenceleft knee injury
References
1
Case No. ADJ2184424
Regular
May 11, 2011

TORY RILEY vs. CITY OF PASADENA

The Appeals Board amended the prior award to find applicant sustained injury only to her right knee, rescinding the finding of a left knee injury as a compensable consequence. The matter was returned to the trial level for a new permanent disability rating for the right knee injury, requiring consideration of the Agreed Medical Examiner's apportionment and prior awards. Temporary disability for a specific period was deferred pending further determination regarding its relation to the now-excluded left knee injury. Applicant's attorney's petition for increased fees was deemed moot and would have been dismissed for procedural noncompliance.

Compensable consequence injuryPermanent disability ratingAgreed Medical Examiner (AME)AMA GuidesApportionmentLeft knee replacementRight knee injuryTemporary disabilityAttorney feesFindings and Award
References
0
Case No. ADJ9239010, ADJ9471758, ADJ9617675
Regular
May 04, 2015

Richard Sullivan vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

This case involved an applicant seeking reconsideration of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board decision that denied industrial injuries to his right ankle, left knee, and psyche. The applicant's primary contention was an error in the date of injury for his left knee claim, arguing it should be February 6, 2014, not February 16, 2014. While the Board granted reconsideration to amend the finding to include both dates, they affirmed the overall decision denying compensability for the knee injury, as it was deemed consequential to a previously non-industrial injury. Therefore, all claimed industrial injuries were ultimately found not compensable.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationJoint Findings of FactIndustrial InjuryConsequential InjuryDate of InjuryWCJApplicantDefendantSelf-Insured
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Riescher v. Central Hudson Gas Electric

A claimant suffered two left knee injuries, first in 1999 and second in 2009, both while working as a lineman for a utility company. The first injury, covered by Alliance National Insurance Co., resulted in a 30% schedule loss of use for the left leg. The second injury, covered by Travelers Indemnity Company of America, led to a total bilateral knee replacement. The cost of left knee surgery was initially apportioned 80% to Alliance and 20% to Travelers. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) later ruled that this apportionment applied only to the *increase* in the schedule loss of use award, not the overall award. The WCLJ found an overall 50% loss of use, representing a 20% increase, and applied the apportionment to this increase, resulting in Alliance being responsible for 46% and Travelers for 4% of the overall award. Alliance appealed, arguing for apportionment of the overall award, but the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision. The appellate court further affirmed the Board's decision, declining to reconsider the method of apportionment.

Workers' Compensation AppealSchedule Loss of UseKnee InjuryApportionmentInsurance Carrier LiabilityWCLJ DecisionBoard ReviewJudicial DiscretionLeft Leg InjuryLien
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 12,986 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