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. WCK 059933
Regular
May 13, 2008

BART RICKMAN (Deceased), LUKE RICKMAN vs. C. OVERAA AND COMPANY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involved a claim for workers' compensation death benefits for Bart Rickman, who died from a drug overdose. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration of the WCJ's finding that Rickman's death did not arise out of or occur in the course of his employment. While Rickman sustained admitted industrial injuries, the evidence, particularly Dr. Allems's opinion, strongly indicated his death was from a recreational heroin overdose, not from prescribed medications for his work-related injuries. The Board found applicant failed to meet the burden of proving industrial causation for the death.

Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardindustrial injurydeath benefitscause of deathrecreational drug useheroin overdosepain managementmedical evidenceQualified Medical Examiner (QME)substantial evidence
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 22, 1989

Doe v. Roe, Inc.

Plaintiff John Doe applied for a financial analyst position with Roe, Inc. but was rejected after urinalysis tests indicated opiates, which Doe attributed to poppy seeds. Roe refused to consider Doe's explanations or offers to prove his denial of opiate abuse. Doe initiated an action alleging Roe violated the Human Rights Law by discriminating against him based on a perceived disability of drug addiction. Defendant Roe moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. The court denied Roe's motion, concluding that Doe had stated a valid claim, as employers must evaluate a disabled applicant's actual capacity to perform job duties rather than relying solely on drug test results.

Employment DiscriminationDrug TestingHuman Rights LawDisability DiscriminationMotion to DismissPerceived DisabilityUrinalysisEmployer LiabilityJob Applicant RightsNew York Law
References
15
Case No. ADJ1707650 (SAL 0075628)
Regular
Jun 20, 2011

KAREN CLARK (Deceased) JEFFREY J. CLARK(Dependent) vs. AIRBORNE EXPRESS/DHL, AMERICAN MANUFACTURER'S INSURANCE COMPANY/SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The applicant sought reconsideration of a decision that barred their death benefit claim due to the statute of limitations. They argued that compensable consequence injuries should be treated as new injuries, with the date of knowledge of industrial causation being the relevant date. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, adopting the judge's report, and amended the findings. The amended finding clarifies the injured worker's death from a Fentanyl overdose and asserts it was a compensable consequence of a prior industrial injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardDeath CaseLabor Code section 5406Compensable consequence injuriesStatute of limitationDate of knowledgeIndustrial injuryFentanyl overdosePetition for reconsiderationFindings and Order
References
0
Case No. ADJ2215482
Regular
Oct 14, 2008

NANCY MCLEARY vs. SATURN OF THOUSAND OAKS, DCH MANAGEMENT, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

This case concerns an applicant seeking workers' compensation for an industrial injury to her back and neck, which exacerbated her need for refills of an intrathecal opiate pump. The defendant argued the pump refills were not industrial in origin, but the Board affirmed the original award, applying the principle that if an industrial injury contributes to the need for medical treatment, the employer is responsible for the entire cost. The Board granted reconsideration solely to defer the issue of the applicant's attorney's fees pending a Supreme Court decision on a related matter.

intrathecal pumpopiate solution refillsindustrial injurypreexisting conditionmedical treatment apportionmentcure or relieveagreed medical evaluatorpain management specialistprior motor vehicle accidentapplicant testimony
References
5
Case No. ADJ7324566
Regular
Apr 09, 2013

BRANDON CLARK DECEASED, JOVELYN CLARK (WIDOW), GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR JOANNA CLARK (MINOR CHILD), BRITTANY CLARK (MINOR CHILD), BENJAMIN CLARK (MINOR CHILD) vs. SOUTH COAST FRAMING, INC., REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a death claim where the decedent, Brandon Clark, died from combined toxic effects of sedating drugs. The defense argued that industrially prescribed medications did not significantly contribute to the death, but the Board upheld the finding that the industrially prescribed amitriptyline was a contributing factor. The Board found ample evidence supported industrial causation, rejecting the defense's attempt to limit causation solely to non-industrial medications and their untimely raised claim of intentional overdose.

Death ClaimIndustrial InjuryReconsiderationWidows BenefitsMinor DependentsToxicologyDrug InteractionCausationExpert OpinionMedical Examiner
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gedon v. University Medical Residents Services, P. C.

The claimant appealed a decision by the Workers’ Compensation Board denying death benefits for her deceased husband, an anesthesiology resident who died from a sufentanil overdose. The Board had ruled that his death did not arise out of and in the course of his employment. The claimant argued that the decedent's addiction was work-related due to job stress and access to narcotic drugs. However, the court affirmed the Board’s decision, finding no substantial medical evidence to specifically link the decedent's drug addiction and subsequent death to the conditions of his employment. The court noted the lack of a clear diagnosis and treating physician testimony to support the claim.

Workers' CompensationDeath BenefitsSubstance AbuseAnesthesiologyOccupational DiseaseMedical ResidencyCausationEmployment-Related InjuryDrug OverdoseAppellate Review
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 20, 2006

In re Hailey W.

This is an appeal from a Family Court order in Steuben County entered July 20, 2006. The order adjudged respondent father, Robert W., neglected his children under Family Court Act article 10 and placed him under supervision. The father appealed the neglect finding, challenging the court's decision, despite a previous stipulation regarding the dispositional portion of the order. The appellate court affirmed the finding of neglect, rejecting the father's preclusion argument. Evidence showed the father abused drugs in front of his children, was hospitalized for an overdose, and admitted daily illegal drug use, which did not qualify for a statutory rehabilitative program exception.

Child NeglectFamily Court Act Article 10Parental RightsDrug AbuseAppellate ReviewPreponderance of EvidenceStipulationDispositional OrderFact-Finding HearingRehabilitative Program
References
8
Case No. 530353
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 25, 2021

Matter of Quigley v. Village of E. Aurora

Daniel Quigley, a police officer with established workers' compensation claims for work-related injuries since 1998 and 2004, developed chronic regional pain syndrome. After years of opiate treatment, his pain management specialist, Cheryl Hart, certified him for medical marihuana in May 2018. The employer and carrier denied the variance request, citing federal preemption by the Controlled Substances Act and statutory exemption under Public Health Law. The Workers' Compensation Board approved the variance, which was upheld by the Appellate Division, Third Department. The court found no conflict preemption and affirmed that workers' compensation carriers are obligated to reimburse for medical marihuana expenses.

Workers' Compensation ClaimsChronic Pain TreatmentMedical MarihuanaVariance ApprovalFederal Preemption DoctrineControlled Substances ActNew York Compassionate Care ActEmployer LiabilityCarrier ReimbursementOpioid Reduction
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 14, 2009

Claim of Fayo v. Crystal Run Health Care, LLP

In May 2004, a registered nurse sustained head, neck, and back injuries after slipping and falling at work, subsequently receiving workers' compensation benefits. Her attempt to return to work was unsuccessful, leading to ongoing pain and severe headaches. On April 13, 2005, she died from an apparent accidental drug overdose. Her spouse, the claimant, sought workers' compensation death benefits, which were granted by a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board, who found a causal relationship between her death and employment. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that post-accident pain led to drug abuse, resulting in death.

Workers' CompensationCausationAccidental DeathDrug OverdoseEmployment InjuryNurseChronic PainMedical TestimonyAppellate ReviewBoard Decision
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 29, 2013

In re Gemiyah T.

The mother appealed a Family Court order from Kings County, dated January 29, 2013, which denied her motion to vacate a prior order denying the return of her children and her motion to dismiss petitions. The underlying child protective proceedings by ACS alleged neglect due to the mother's mental illness and excessive corporal punishment. The appellate court modified the order, granting the mother's motion to vacate the June 29, 2012, order. This decision was based on new evidence: a medical note confirming legally prescribed Tylenol with codeine use for hand surgery, which accounted for a positive opiate drug test. The case is now remitted to the Family Court for further proceedings.

Child Protective ServicesNeglect PetitionParental RightsMotion to VacateNewly Discovered EvidenceDrug Test ResultsFamily Court Act Article 10CPLR 5015Appellate DivisionRemand
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 15 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