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. 2024 NY Slip Op 04848 [231 AD3d 1213]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2024

Matter of DiPippo v. Accurate Signs & Awnings

Michael DiPippo sustained work-related injuries in an August 2006 fall, leading to an established claim later amended to include consequential right leg deep vein thrombosis and obesity. He underwent amputations of both legs in 2014 and 2018. DiPippo sought to amend his claim to include the consequential amputation of his right leg, arguing it was caused by conditions linked to his initial injury. The Workers' Compensation Board disallowed the amendment, finding insufficient medical proof of a causal connection. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that DiPippo did not qualify as a medical expert and his independent analysis or generalized statements of possibility were inadequate to establish the required causal nexus.

Workers' CompensationAmputationCausal NexusMedical EvidenceExpert TestimonyBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceWork-Related InjuryClaimant Burden of Proof
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Illinois Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Wilson

R. E. Wilson, an employee, filed for worker's compensation benefits after sustaining a leg injury in July 1977 that ultimately led to the amputation of his left leg in January 1979. The initial laceration was aggravated over time, leading to circulatory problems and gangrene. A jury initially found in Wilson's favor, awarding medical expenses and finding a causal link between the injury and the total loss of use of his foot. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, ruling that neither the lay testimony of Wilson nor the medical expert testimony of Dr. Crawford provided sufficient 'reasonable medical probability' to establish a causal connection between the initial injury and the subsequent amputation.

Worker's CompensationAmputationArteriosclerosisCausationMedical Expert TestimonyLay TestimonyAppellate ReviewDirected VerdictInjury AggravationCirculatory System Impairment
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 13, 1979

In re the Claim of D'Amore v. Town of Hempstead

A claimant appealed a decision from the Workers’ Compensation Board regarding injuries sustained during employment. The claimant was injured by a falling heater, striking his head, right big toe, and leg, leading to subsequent ulceration, gangrene, and amputations of the toe and leg. Although initial medical reports only noted a head injury, later testimony from the claimant and medical experts, Dr. Grauer and Dr. Ahmad, established the link between the workplace accident and the toe and leg injuries. The Board found the injuries causally related. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that substantial evidence supported the findings.

AmputationGangreneUlcerationToe injuryLeg injuryHead injuryWorkplace accidentCredibilitySubstantial evidenceWorkers' Compensation
References
1
Case No. LAO 829404, LAO 815773
Regular
Jul 20, 2007

LOLONDRA McCOY vs. AVIATION SAFEGUARDS aka COMMAND SECURITY, KEMPER GROUP

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded a previous award of vocational rehabilitation benefits. The Board found no substantial evidence to support the applicant's claim that her diabetes, left leg amputation, or right toe amputation were industrially caused, despite the treating physician's opinion. The case was remanded to the trial level for further proceedings to clarify industrial causation for the specific body parts claimed as injured.

Vocational RehabilitationIndustrial CausationDiabetesAmputationQMETreating DoctorCompromise and ReleaseThomas FindingContinuous TraumaLabor Code section 5908.5
References
3
Case No. 536065
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 03, 2024

In the Matter of the Claim of Michael Dipippo

The claimant, Michael DiPippo, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that denied his request to amend an existing work-related injury claim to include the consequential amputation of his right leg. The Board found the medical proof insufficient to establish a causal connection between the initial work injury and the subsequent amputation. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the claimant, despite his personal experience and research, did not qualify as a medical expert. The court also noted that medical opinions must demonstrate a probability of the underlying cause, not just a possibility, to satisfy the burden of proof for establishing a causal nexus.

Workers' CompensationAmputationCausal NexusMedical EvidenceExpert TestimonyBurden of ProofAppellate ReviewInjury ClaimBoard DecisionThird Judicial Department
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hughes v. Globe Co.

The plaintiff, who had sustained multiple leg injuries and subsequently undergone amputations, sought to reopen his workmen's compensation case, alleging that the subsequent amputations were caused by previously compensated frostbite injuries. The defendants, The Globe Company, Inc., et al., filed a demurrer based on the Statute of Limitations and prior adjudication, which the Circuit Court of Davidson County sustained. On appeal, the Court affirmed the circuit court's decision, citing T.C.A. Sections 50-1025 and 50-1006. The Court ruled that only court-approved settlements or awards payable periodically for more than six months could be reopened and modified. Since the plaintiff's original award was a litigated judgment not payable periodically for more than six months, the Court found the judgment to be final, despite acknowledging the sympathetic nature of the case.

Workmen's CompensationAppealCase ReopeningStatutory InterpretationStatute of LimitationsPrior AdjudicationPermanent Partial DisabilityAmputationFrostbite InjuryJudicial Review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Home Insurance Co. v. Gillum

This is a worker's compensation case where the appellee, James Gillum, recovered total and permanent disability benefits after sustaining a lower back injury while working for Berry Contracting in 1981. Following the injury, he developed circulatory problems in his right leg, leading to the amputation of his toe and subsequently his leg below the knee. The appellant, the insurer, challenged the trial court's rulings on the exclusion of evidence regarding Gillum's prior medical problems and alleged injurious practices like alcohol abuse and smoking, which were argued to be the 'sole cause' of his disability. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding no error in excluding the evidence or denying special issues related to the 'sole cause' and 'injurious practices' defenses, and upholding the court's instructions regarding producing cause and aggravation by medical treatment.

Worker's CompensationPermanent DisabilityBack InjuryLeg AmputationSole Cause DefenseInjurious PracticesMedical Treatment AggravationCollateral Source RuleImpeachmentEvidence Exclusion
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Deering v. Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n

The estate of a deceased worker, James Deering, appealed a trial court's decision which set aside an Industrial Accident Board award. Deering, a security guard, allegedly injured his left leg on January 4, 1975, while on duty, which later led to amputation and death. The worker's compensation carrier disputed the injury occurred within the course and scope of employment, and a jury failed to find that Deering received an injury. The central issue on appeal was the trial court's exclusion of Deering's statement, "he bumped his leg back there," under the res gestae and present bodily condition exceptions to the hearsay rule. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding insufficient independent evidence to corroborate an accidental injury within the scope of employment to admit the statement as res gestae.

Hearsay ExceptionRes GestaePresent Bodily ConditionWorker's CompensationAccidental InjuryScope of EmploymentEvidence AdmissibilityAmputationBlood ClotsTexas Law
References
2
Case No. 529417
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 06, 2020

Matter of Johnson v. City of New York

Thomas Johnson, a patient care technician, sustained work-related knee injuries in a February 2006 fall. He subsequently sustained additional work-related injuries in November 2009 to his neck, back, shoulder, and hips, for which he received schedule loss of use (SLU) awards for his right arm, left leg, and right leg. The Workers' Compensation Board later ruled on the permanency of his 2006 injuries, finding an 80% SLU for his left leg and a 40% SLU for his right leg. However, the Board reduced these new awards by his previously received SLU awards for the 2009 injuries, resulting in a final 30% SLU for his left leg and a 0% SLU for his right leg. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, confirming that SLU awards for the knee and hip are encompassed within leg awards, and prior leg SLU awards must be deducted from subsequent leg SLU awards.

Schedule Loss of UseKnee InjuriesHip InjuriesLeg ImpairmentPrior SLU Award DeductionAppellate Division ReviewIndependent Medical ExaminationTreating Physician ReportPermanent Impairment GuidelinesWork-related Accident
References
9
Case No. ADJ4702691 (VNO 0458547) ADJ8091654 ADJ1958137
Regular
Feb 21, 2014

MICHAEL REID vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, permissibly self-insured, administered by SEDGWICK CMS

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board reconsidered an administrative law judge's decision regarding three consolidated claims. The Board found substantial evidence that a workplace incident in 2001 contributed to the applicant's leg amputation, necessitating further medical treatment. However, the Board rescinded findings on other claims and issues, including permanent disability and apportionment, due to deficiencies in the medical evidence. The case is remanded for reassignment to a new judge for further development of the medical record.

ReconsiderationAgreed Medical Evaluator (AME)Cumulative traumaSpecific injuryIndustrial injuryNonindustrialSubstantial medical evidenceRight lower extremityAmputationPeripheral vascular disease
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 558 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