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
Jul 09, 1982

Claim of Bartolotta v. Metz

Claimant, a 59-year-old inside painter with a pre-existing arteriosclerotic heart disease, suffered a myocardial infarction on January 5, 1979, while painting at work. He had experienced a similar episode in December 1978 but did not seek medical attention. The Workers' Compensation Board found the myocardial infarction compensable, stating the painting work involved more exertion than the ordinary wear and tear of life given his pre-existing condition. The employer and carrier appealed, arguing the work was not strenuous. The court affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial medical evidence that the exertion of painting precipitated the cardiac event.

myocardial infarctionarteriosclerotic heart diseasecompensable injurystrenuous workpre-existing conditionmedical testimony conflictsubstantial evidenceWorkers' Compensation Lawcausationappellate review
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Wilcox v. Village of Endicott

Claimant, a lieutenant with the Village of Endicott Police Department, filed for benefits after suffering a myocardial infarction, contending it was causally related to his job activities. Initially, a referee found in favor of the claimant, but the Workers’ Compensation Board later rescinded the award. The Board referred the claimant to an impartial cardiologist, Dr. Dean, for an opinion on causal relation. Based on Dr. Dean’s report and testimony, the Board disallowed the claim, a decision which the court affirmed. The court found substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision, noting that both Dr. Dean and Dr. Walters testified the claimant suffered a transmural myocardial infarction, not a subendocardial one, which cannot be caused by work effort.

Workers' CompensationMyocardial InfarctionCausationMedical TestimonyImpartial CardiologistSubendocardial InfarctionTransmural Myocardial InfarctionWork-Related InjuryAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Parish v. Rolex Plastics, Inc.

This is an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision filed on February 24, 1981. The claimant experienced chest pains and suffered a myocardial infarction while working. The Board concluded that the infarction resulted from an underlying heart disease and was not an accidental injury arising from employment. On appeal, the claimant contended a lack of substantial evidence and the employer's failure to timely file a notice of controversy. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence based on an impartial cardiologist's testimony and noting that the timeliness issue was not raised before the Board.

Workers' Compensation AppealMyocardial InfarctionUnderlying Heart DiseaseAccidental InjuryCausal RelationshipSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionConflicting Medical TestimonyNotice of ControversyWCL Section 25
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 10, 1979

Raio v. Hawaii Kai Restaurant

Claimant, a guitarist, suffered an acute myocardial infarction while performing after physical exertion during employment. The Workers’ Compensation Board determined the injury was causally related to his employment, a decision subsequently challenged on appeal. Although an impartial specialist opined against causal relation, the record contained other medical testimony and reports supporting the Board's decision. The appellate court affirmed the Board's finding, assessing costs against the employer and its insurance carrier.

Myocardial InfarctionOccupational InjuryCausationMedical TestimonyWorkers' Compensation AppealBoard DecisionSubstantial EvidenceGuitaristPhysical ExertionAppellate Review
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Gracie v. C. E. Halback Co.

This case concerns an appeal from an award of death benefits by the Workmen’s Compensation Board, which found a causal relationship between Robert Graeie's death on March 30, 1961, and a compensable myocardial infarction he sustained on April 10, 1950. The decedent, an iron worker, underwent vascular surgery after the initial infarction, leading to a post-operative myocardial infarction that was the immediate cause of his death. Appellants contested the causal relation. However, medical testimony supported the Board’s determination, indicating that the 1950 myocardial infarction initiated a chain of events that culminated in his death. Physicians testified that without the initial infarction, Graeie would have been better equipped to withstand the subsequent fatal event, affirming a progressive downhill course since his first cardiac incident. The Board's decision, finding causal relation, was affirmed.

Myocardial InfarctionCausal RelationDeath BenefitsWorkers' CompensationVascular SurgeryEmbolusPost-operative ComplicationsMedical TestimonyAppellate ReviewBoard Decision
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Gallo v. Village of Bronxville Police Department

Claimant, a police sergeant, filed for workers' compensation benefits after suffering a myocardial infarction on December 18, 2008. He experienced symptoms after exercising and ascending stairs at work, leading to a diagnosis of myocardial infarction. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that the infarction was caused by the stair climbing and arose out of his employment. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's ruling, citing substantial medical evidence from two cardiologists who opined that the work-related stair climbing precipitated the myocardial infarction, even with a preexisting coronary artery disease.

myocardial infarctionwork-related injuryworkers' compensationaccidental injurymedical causationpreexisting conditionstair climbingpolice sergeantappealBoard decision
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Strauss v. Freiheit

A claimant appealed a decision by the Workmen’s Compensation Board from August 14, 1969, which found no causal relationship between the decedent’s work activities and his death. The decedent, an Assistant Manager and editorial writer, died on July 13, 1967, from an acute myocardial infarct after an emotional board meeting. He had a history of myocardial infarction. The board concluded that the stress of the meeting was not exceptional for a worker and thus, the myocardial infarction was not an accidental injury arising from employment. The court affirmed this decision, stating it was supported by substantial evidence, while a dissenting opinion argued for reversal based on more recent Court of Appeals rulings on compensable stress.

Workmen's CompensationCausal RelationshipMyocardial InfarctionWork-related StressAccidental InjuryEmotional StressBoard Decision AffirmationDissenting OpinionCardiac EventStrenuous Work Rule
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Furch v. Bucci

A firefighter for the City of Binghamton sought supplemental wage benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-a, claiming arteriosclerosis and acute myocardial infarction were job-related. After initial denials and an administrative hearing, the application was again denied. The Supreme Court partially dismissed his CPLR article 78 petition but transferred a substantial evidence question to this Court. This Court affirmed due process and the non-binding nature of a workers' compensation decision regarding arteriosclerosis. However, it ruled that respondents were bound by the workers' compensation finding that the myocardial infarction was causally related to employment. Consequently, the matter was remitted to determine the petitioner's entitlement to benefits for any period of disability solely attributable to the myocardial infarction.

Firefighter benefitsGeneral Municipal Law Section 207-aWorkers' Compensation LawCPLR Article 78Myocardial InfarctionArteriosclerosisCausal RelationDue ProcessAdministrative LawRes Judicata
References
7
Case No. 67209218
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Kane v. Hart & Krouse Corp.

The case involves an appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Board regarding the timeliness of a claim for a myocardial infarction. The claimant, a sandblaster, suffered a myocardial infarction in April 1967. An initial C-3 form filed in September 1968 listed 'silicosis,' but subsequent medical reports by Dr. Edward C. Alessi detailed a heart condition. A later C-3 form in September 1972 specifically mentioned the myocardial infarction. The employer argued the cardiac claim, filed in 1972, was untimely under Workers’ Compensation Law section 28. The Board found that the September 1968 filing, combined with the medical reports, sufficiently alerted the carrier to the claimant's condition. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence to support the timeliness of the claim.

Timeliness of ClaimMyocardial InfarctionSilicosisWorkers' Compensation LawNotice to CarrierMedical ReportsPermanent DisabilityHeart ConditionOccupational DiseaseC-3 Form
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 1979

Claim of Mitchell v. Nason's Delivery, Inc.

The claimant, a truck driver with 29 years of experience, suffered a myocardial infarction at work on August 16, 1978, while unloading heavy cartons from his employer's truck. He experienced symptoms like numbness, shortness of breath, and profuse sweating, leading to hospitalization. During the hearing, two doctors testified that his work efforts did not contribute to the heart attack. However, Dr. Smith provided a medical opinion, supported by a detailed hypothesis, stating that the claimant's exertion on that day could have precipitated the myocardial infarction, irrespective of his accustomed activity. The Workers’ Compensation Board, relying on Dr. Smith's testimony and legal precedents regarding the certainty of medical opinions, found sufficient stress to establish a causal relationship between the employment and the myocardial infarction. The decision of the Board was affirmed, with costs awarded against the employer and its insurance carrier.

Workers' CompensationHeart attackMyocardial infarctionExertionCausal relationshipMedical opinionSubstantial evidenceEmployment-related injuryOccupational stressAppellate Division
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 130 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