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. ADJ1335306 (SJO 0252339)
Regular
Feb 09, 2011

NANCY CUDDY vs. ALAIN PINEL REALTORS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the employer's petition for reconsideration of a prior award. The employer argued that the 2005 permanent disability rating schedule should apply, not the 1997 schedule, and that there was insufficient medical evidence for the finding of dry mouth. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to defer the issues of permanent disability and apportionment. This decision was based on the fact that the treating physician's reports, crucial for determining the applicable rating schedule, were not admitted into evidence. The Board affirmed the finding of dry mouth as a compensable consequence injury based on existing medical evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAlain Pinel RealtorsState Compensation Insurance FundADJ1335306Opinion and Order Granting Petition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and Orderindustrial injuryreal estate agentspineleft ankle
References
3
Case No. ADJ6675568
Regular
May 01, 2015

GERALD KEYES vs. B&L MECHANICAL, LINCOLN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the finding of industrial injury to the applicant's teeth. This injury was found to be a consequence of medications prescribed for a prior industrial back injury, which caused dry mouth and accelerated tooth decay. While the apportionment of industrial versus non-industrial causation was debated, the Board found substantial medical evidence supporting that the industrial medications contributed to the dental condition. The decision focused on causation of injury, not permanent disability apportionment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGerald KeyesB&L MechanicalLincoln General Insurance CompanyADJ6675568dental injuryhyposalivationPQMEDr. Gregory StephensDr. Dennis Shamlian
References
1
Case No. ADJ11053903
Regular
May 06, 2019

XIAO MEI MA vs. LIN GU, LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMAPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior award, amending it to exclude injury to the applicant's right shoulder. The Board found substantial evidence supported injury to the applicant's mouth, lumbar spine, and left knee, allowing the award for temporary disability and future medical treatment to stand. The employer failed to meet their burden to prove available modified work, thus supporting the temporary disability award. The Board also admonished defense counsel for inappropriate assertions in their petition.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardTemporary Disability IndemnityMedical TreatmentQualified Medical ExaminerSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionAdmonishmentOdd Lot Doctrine
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 05, 1983

Claim of Hughes v. New York Telephone Co.

A line foreman, though not on duty, was requested by his employer to check a report of a broken pole. While preparing to use a company car parked in his driveway for this task, he sustained an injury to his mouth after stepping on a rake. The Workers’ Compensation Board found that this injury arose out of and in the course of his employment. The employer appealed, arguing that, as a matter of law, the injury did not arise from employment. The court affirmed the Board's decision, applying the 'special errand' exception to the general rule regarding risks of travel to and from work. It concluded that the Board's finding was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationSpecial Errand ExceptionCourse of EmploymentArising Out of EmploymentOff-Duty WorkEmployee InjuryAppellate ReviewAffirmationOccupational HazardWorkplace Accident
References
3
Case No. ADJ1884241
Regular
Jun 25, 2013

ANTONIA CERVANTES vs. PRIDE INDUSTRIES, LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of an order imposing sanctions on lien claimant, Word of Mouth Interpreters, and its attorneys, Gonzales Law Firm. The board adopted the WCJ's report, finding that the lien claimant improperly filed a petition for reconsideration without statutory grounds and attached unnecessary exhibits. The WCJ noted the lien claimant's pattern of conduct, including failure to appear at hearings and improper attempts to withdraw filings, which led to unnecessary litigation expenses. Sanctions were deemed appropriate due to the lien claimant's lack of due care and respect for the venue.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportEAMSAmended Notice of IntentionRules of Practice and ProcedureDeficient PetitionStatutory GroundsLien ClaimantDeclaration of Readiness to Proceed
References
1
Case No. ADJ3882013
Regular
Mar 22, 2023

TERESA LARA vs. DAUGHTERS OF MARY AND JOSEPH, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Dental Trauma Center's petition for reconsideration, upholding the finding that the lien claimant failed to prove applicant sustained industrial injury to the psyche, headaches, or TMJ/mouth/jaw/teeth. The Board adopted the WCJ's reasoning that Dental Trauma Center did not meet its burden of proof as it failed to present substantial medical evidence supporting these claims. Consequently, the burden never shifted to the defendant to provide rebuttal evidence. The Board also addressed and rejected the petitioner's arguments regarding proper referral, lack of incorporation, and the binding nature of the Compromise and Release.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardLien ClaimantStatute of LimitationsBurden of ProofSubstantial Medical EvidencePrima Facie CaseRebuttal EvidenceProper ReferralCompromise and Release
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2005

United States v. DiPietro

During jury selection for a multi-defendant case, defendant Nicola Murdocca, who is undergoing chemotherapy for lung cancer, suffered a dramatic medical collapse in the courtroom. This incident, involving audible moaning, foaming at the mouth, and Murdocca yelling about his cancer, caused pandemonium and drew attention from jurors, other defendants, and defense counsel. Paramedics were called, and Murdocca was later discharged from the hospital after being treated for dizziness. The Government requested a new jury selection, citing contamination. The Court granted Murdocca's severance application on medical grounds and dismissed the existing jury pool, deeming them unable to be impartial due to the traumatic events and certain courtroom interactions.

Jury selectionMistrialDefendant illnessSeveranceJury impartialityCourtroom incidentChemotherapyLung cancerDue processJudicial discretion
References
4
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 00827 [158 AD3d 622]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 07, 2018

Matter of Deandre A.

The appellant, Deandre A., appealed an order of fact-finding and disposition from the Family Court, Westchester County, which adjudicated him a juvenile delinquent. The Family Court found that he committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute attempted strangulation in the second degree, criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation, and attempted assault in the third degree. These findings were based on evidence that the appellant put his hands around a social worker's neck, applied pressure, and covered her nose and mouth, causing pain and leaving marks. The Appellate Division affirmed the order, finding the evidence legally sufficient and the Family Court's fact-finding determination not against the weight of the evidence.

Juvenile DelinquencyAttempted StrangulationCriminal Obstruction of BreathingAttempted AssaultLegal Sufficiency of EvidenceWeight of EvidenceFamily Court AppealAppellate ReviewSocial Worker AssaultCriminal Law
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re T. Children

The Family Court of Bronx County dismissed neglect petitions brought by the Commissioner of Social Services against the respondent mother, Betty T. The appellate court unanimously reversed this decision, finding that the Family Court erred in its assessment of witness credibility, specifically discrediting the petitioner's expert witnesses and homemakers while fully crediting the respondent's testimony. Evidence presented included the mother's pattern of placing and reclaiming children from foster care, causing instability, and instances of physical abuse, such as stuffing a T-shirt into a child's mouth and handling another roughly. The case has been remanded for a new fact-finding hearing before a different Family Court Judge to better determine the children's best interests.

Child NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewFact-Finding HearingReversalRemandEvidentiary ErrorWitness CredibilityCorporal PunishmentFoster Care
References
3
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 03080 [228 AD3d 426]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 06, 2024

DiMaggio v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

Plaintiffs Salvatore DiMaggio et al. alleged that Salvatore was struck in the face by a metal rod during a construction project, resulting in injuries to his face, head, and spine, as well as aggravation of prior asymptomatic conditions. Defendants Port Authority of New York and New Jersey et al. subsequently sought authorizations for records related to 19 prior incidents involving an individual named "Salvatore DiMaggio" and moved to compel discovery or dismiss the case. The Supreme Court initially granted defendants' motion to the extent of compelling plaintiffs to provide a Jackson affidavit and authorizations. However, the Appellate Division modified this order, ruling that the requirement for a Jackson affidavit was improper, as that procedure applies when documents are claimed to be missing, not when seeking authorizations from third parties, and CPLR 3130 prohibits interrogatories upon a party served with a demand for a bill of particulars. The Appellate Division affirmed the compulsion for plaintiffs to provide authorizations for records related to claims made by Salvatore and incidents in which he was involved, given his acknowledgement of involvement in some prior incidents and failure to timely object to the demands. The court further limited the scope of these authorizations to records relating to injuries to or treatment of Salvatore DiMaggio's face, mouth, head, cervical spine, and/or thoracolumbar spine, due to the nature of the alleged injuries and the principle that general anxiety/depression from physical injuries does not place entire mental health into contention, while allowing them to be unrestricted by date due to allegations of exacerbated preexisting injuries.

DiscoveryAuthorizationsMedical RecordsPreexisting InjuriesJackson AffidavitCPLR 3126CPLR 3130Waiver of ObjectionAppellate ProcedurePersonal Injury
References
11
Showing 1-10 of 10 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