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 Tedesco v. Stewart & Bennett, Inc.

Claimant sustained a compensable back injury on September 14, 1977, leading to disc surgery. An administrative law judge classified claimant with a permanent partial disability, apportioning 25% to pre-existing causes and 75% to the accident, determining this 75% was a 50% loss of earning capacity and awarded maximum reduced earnings of $95 per week. The carrier appealed this rate, but the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the ALJ's finding. The court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the effectively assigned 50% loss of earnings capacity and permanent partial disability to the industrial accident justified the maximum rate under the Workers’ Compensation Law.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityApportionmentReduced EarningsEarning CapacityBack InjuryDisc ProtrusionAdministrative Law JudgeAppealMaximum Rate
References
4
Case No. ADJ9196537
Regular
Nov 10, 2015

PHYLLIS HAREN vs. CITY OF SACRAMENTO, self-insured and self-administered

This case involves a reserve police officer injured on duty whose average weekly earnings were only $84.38. The applicant successfully argued that under Labor Code sections 3362.5 and 4458.2, her temporary and permanent disability indemnity should be calculated at the maximum rate, not based on her actual earnings. The Appeals Board amended the WCJ's decision to award these benefits at the maximum statutory rates. The applicant's attorney was awarded a fee of $4500.00 for securing this increased compensation.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDReserve Police OfficerIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderTemporary Disability IndemnityPermanent Disability IndemnityMaximum RateLabor Code Sections3362.54458.2
References
0
Case No. 03-03-00277-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 13, 2004

Glen Smith v. Maximum Racing, Inc.

This appellate case concerns a dispute between Glen Smith and Maximum Racing, Inc. following the termination of an agreement to provide race cars for Smith's son. Smith refused to return a racing car, claiming Maximum Racing owed him for "compensable work" and sought a lien. Maximum Racing counterclaimed for conversion. A jury found Smith had not performed compensable work, leading the trial court to rule for Maximum Racing. On appeal, Smith challenged the waiver of the conversion claim, the finding of conversion without compensable work, and asserted a good-faith defense. The Third District Court of Appeals, at Austin, affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the conversion claim was not waived, the jury's finding was supported by evidence, and good faith is not a valid defense to conversion under Texas law.

ConversionProperty LawContract DisputeAppellate ProcedureJury VerdictWorker's LienGood Faith DefenseWaiver of ClaimsTexas Court of AppealsAutomotive Industry
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gioia v. Cattaraugus County Nursing Home

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision regarding a claimant's reduced earnings award. The claimant, a nurse's aide with a permanent partial disability from a back injury, had her weekly compensation rate adjusted by the Board to be based on her actual reduced earnings from her current job, rather than her degree of disability. The employer and its workers' compensation carrier appealed, arguing that the Board should have considered the claimant's capacity to earn more. The court affirmed the Board's decision, reiterating that for claimants demonstrating labor market attachment, wage-earning capacity must be determined exclusively by actual earnings during disability, as evidence of capacity to earn more or less, including medical evidence of disability degree, is prohibited.

reduced earnings awardpermanent partial disabilitywage earning capacitylabor market attachmentactual earningsworkers' compensation lawappeal decisionjudicial reviewindependent medical examinationemployer appeal
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lyublinsky v. Barnhart

A 73-year-old disabled plaintiff, who has received Social Security Disability (SSD) benefits since 1993, brought this action to review the Commissioner's final determination concerning his benefit rate calculation. The plaintiff argued that his benefit rate was improperly calculated, citing discrepancies in earnings records and claims of discrimination. The case has a lengthy procedural history, including multiple remands from the District Court due to issues like denial of a fair hearing and lack of legal representation. The Court conducted a de novo review of the Social Security Administration's (SSA) benefit calculations, utilizing the Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME) method, and found no mathematical errors. Ultimately, the plaintiff failed to present compelling evidence to disprove the SSA's records, which are considered conclusive after a statutory period. Consequently, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings was granted, the complaint was dismissed, and the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision was affirmed.

Social Security DisabilityBenefit CalculationAIME MethodAdministrative Law JudgePro Se PlaintiffFederal Court ReviewEarnings RecordsBurden of ProofRemandJudgment on the Pleadings
References
3
Case No. OAK 0280463
Regular
Dec 12, 2007

MICHAEL ELDERKIN vs. RCC CONSTRUCTORS AND CIGA BY BROADSPIRE SERVICES FOR LEGION INSURANCE COMPANY, IN LIQUIDATION

This case concerns a worker's compensation applicant seeking reconsideration of an award that set his average weekly wage below the maximum rate. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding that the defendant failed to demonstrate good cause to withdraw from a prior stipulation between the parties establishing the applicant's earnings at the maximum rate. The Board emphasized that stipulations should be upheld unless there is clear evidence of mistake or inadvertence, not simply an unfavorable outcome for a party.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardMichael ElderkinRCC ConstructorsCIGABroadspire ServicesLegion Insurance CompanyIron FabricatorIndustrial InjuryBack InjuryHip Injury
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Campolo v. International Ladies Garment Workers Union

The claimant appealed decisions from the Workers' Compensation Board concerning reduced earnings benefits for a right hip injury sustained in 1973, which aggravated a prior 1962 injury. The Board had affirmed a referee's award of $70 reduced earnings, calculating the 50% apportionment factor for the pre-existing injury after determining the maximum average weekly wage. The appellants argued that the method of calculation was erroneous. The court agreed, finding that the Board incorrectly applied the 50% apportionment to the claimant's average weekly wage of $140 instead of the statutory maximum weekly rate of $80. Consequently, the case was reversed and remitted to the Board for recalculation in accordance with Workers’ Compensation Law § 15.

Calculation errorApportionment factorReduced earningsPermanent partial disabilityPre-existing injuryStatutory interpretationWorkers’ Compensation LawRemittalAppealHip injury
References
1
Case No. 2018-01-0224
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 23, 2019

Yearby, Reginald v. Armstrong Relocation

This expedited hearing addressed whether the employee, Reginald Yearby, was entitled to temporary disability benefits at the maximum compensation rate of $992.20, and if the employer, Armstrong Relocation, was due a credit for overpayment. The Court found Mr. Yearby's actual taxable earnings were significantly less than initially stated, derived from his 2016 and 2017 tax returns, even though he was treated as an employee for workers' compensation purposes despite being an independent contractor. Citing Tennessee Code Annotated, the Court determined Mr. Yearby's correct average weekly wage was $552.50, leading to a compensation rate of $368.35. Consequently, his request for maximum benefits was denied, and Armstrong Relocation was granted a credit for past overpayments.

Temporary disability benefitsWorkers' CompensationAverage weekly wageOverpaymentExpedited hearingIndependent contractorEarningsBusiness expensesCompensation rateMedical treatment
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 22, 2015

Claim of Barrett v. New York City Department of Transportation

The case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding a claimant injured in a 2011 work-related motor vehicle accident. A WCLJ classified the claimant with a permanent partial disability and a 25% loss of wage-earning capacity, ruling that he would be entitled to 250 weeks of benefits if his full wages ceased. The Board affirmed this, leading the employer to appeal, arguing that the claimant's current full wages meant a 100% wage-earning capacity, rendering the 25% loss finding unlawful. The court affirmed the Board’s decision, distinguishing between 'loss of wage-earning capacity' (fixed, for benefit duration) and 'wage-earning capacity' (fluctuating, for weekly rates).

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityWage-Earning CapacityLoss of Wage-Earning CapacityBenefit DurationAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationMotor Vehicle AccidentNew York Workers' Compensation BoardDisability Classification
References
2
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 03088 [194 AD3d 1205]
Regular Panel Decision
May 13, 2021

Matter of O'Flaherty v. MRZ Trucking Corp.

Claimant, a tractor trailer driver, had an established claim for a work-related back injury. Following spinal fusion surgery, his disability status and wage-earning capacity were reclassified multiple times by a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and the Workers' Compensation Board. The Board, on its own motion, modified an earnings award period from October 6, 2016, to June 25, 2018, reducing it to the permanent partial disability rate without explanation. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found this modification unsupported by substantial medical evidence. The court noted that medical examiners, including the carrier's own, had indicated a temporary total or marked partial temporary disability during the disputed period and that maximum medical improvement was not reached until January 2018. Consequently, the court modified the Board's decision by reversing the reduction in claimant's earnings award for the specified period and remitted the matter for further proceedings consistent with its decision.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Total DisabilityWage-Earning CapacitySpinal Fusion SurgeryIndependent Medical Examination (IME)Appellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceReclassification of DisabilityMedical Impairment
References
9
Showing 1-10 of 3,243 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