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 Harrington v. L.C. Whitford Co.

The claimant, a construction worker, experienced a severe exacerbation of pre-existing asthma after exposure to burning lead paint fumes in June 1996. A certified pulmonologist, Richard Evans, determined the exposure caused a permanent and total disability. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found an accidental injury causing permanent and total disability, which the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed in August 2001. The employer and carrier appealed, arguing the condition was pre-existing and only temporarily aggravated. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence to support that the work-site exposure significantly exacerbated the claimant's stabilized asthma, leading to a permanent and total disability.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Total DisabilityAsthma ExacerbationOccupational ExposureLead Paint FumesPre-existing ConditionMedical Expert TestimonySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewIndustrial Accident
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of VanDermark v. Frontier Insurance

In this workers' compensation appeal, the employer and its carrier challenged two decisions by the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning a claimant's permanent total disability. The claimant sustained a back injury in 1998 and was initially found to have a permanent partial disability. However, the Board later modified the award, concluding the claimant had a permanent total disability after August 2004, a finding supported by the testimony of her treating orthopedic surgeon despite conflicting medical evidence. The employer also contested the denial of their applications for reconsideration and/or full Board review, arguing insufficient evidence and an abuse of discretion. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decisions, deferring to its resolution of conflicting medical evidence and finding no arbitrary or capricious action in denying reconsideration, as no new evidence was presented.

Workers' Compensation LawPermanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityMedical EvidenceConflicting Medical OpinionsBoard's DiscretionReconsideration ApplicationFull Board ReviewAppellate ReviewSufficiency of Evidence
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Linger v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.

Claimant sustained permanent partial disabilities from two 1977 accidents and one 1980 accident, leading to separate awards from different employers and their respective insurance carriers. Initially, the claimant received concurrent benefits exceeding the statutory maximum rate. Upon discovering these concurrent payments, a joint hearing was held. An Administrative Law Judge apportioned the award, which was subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board, stating that concurrent awards exceeding the statutory maximum for a permanent partial disability were impermissible. The claimant appealed this decision, arguing for a per-accident application of the statutory maximum. However, the appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, asserting that the Workers' Compensation Law establishes an overall maximum rate for permanent partial disability regardless of the number of accidents or employments.

Permanent Partial DisabilityConcurrent AwardsStatutory MaximumApportionmentMultiple AccidentsWage LossJudicial PrecedentAdministrative Law JudgeWorkers' Compensation BoardInsurance Carriers
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 08, 1983

Claim of McNeil v. Geary

The claimant, a groom, injured her left knee in 1979 and was initially found temporarily totally disabled. The Workers' Compensation Board later reclassified her injury as a 15% permanent partial disability of the left leg, dating from the time of injury, and increased her benefits based on wage expectancy due to her being under 25. The employer appealed, arguing that wage expectancy benefits should not apply to the period of temporary total disability and that the record didn't substantiate a permanent partial disability ab initio. The court affirmed the Board's decision, stating that reclassification is a factual determination within the Board's sole province and was based on substantial evidence, and that the Board has continuing jurisdictional power to modify findings.

Permanent Partial DisabilityWage ExpectancyWorkers' Compensation LawInjury ReclassificationBoard JurisdictionSubstantial EvidenceLeft Knee InjuryGroomRiding AcademyTemporary Total Disability
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Williams v. Preferred Meal Systems

Claimant, a driver, suffered injuries to his right knee and back in 2009 while making a delivery, leading to an established workers' compensation claim. The claim was later amended to include consequential adjustment disorder, and the Workers' Compensation Board ultimately found that claimant had sustained a permanent total disability from May 2012 onward. The employer, workers’ compensation carrier, and policy administrator appealed this decision, arguing that further proof was needed regarding claimant's vocational and functional capacity. The court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that extensive evidence of vocational and functional capacity is not required when medical proof demonstrates a permanent total disability and inability to engage in any gainful employment, as benefits continue for life in such cases. The court found substantial evidence in the opinions of treating and independent medical examination orthopedists to support the finding of permanent total disability.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Total DisabilityWage-Earning CapacityMedical ProofVocational CapacityFunctional CapacityAppellate ReviewNew York LawDisability BenefitsClaimant Rights
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Baltsavias v. Caldor, Inc.

Claimant sustained work-related injuries in August 1975 and March 1977, leading to a permanent partial disability. The Workers’ Compensation Board apportioned the disability 25% to the 1975 case and 75% to the 1977 case, sustaining awards and an allowance for claimant’s former attorneys. The claimant appealed, arguing for permanent total disability and challenging legal fees. However, the court found these arguments outside the scope of the appeal, noting that prior decisions had established the nature and extent of disability and no timely appeal was taken. Reviewing the record, the court found substantial evidence to support the Board’s factual findings regarding carrier responsibility for medical bills and the average weekly wage. Consequently, the Board’s decision was affirmed.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityAppealBoard DecisionMedical BillsAverage Weekly WageCausally Related DisabilityTimelinessLegal FeesReopened Cases
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Wohlfeil v. Sharel Ventures, LLC

The claimant, injured in October 2007, was initially found by a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and affirmed by the Workers’ Compensation Board to have a permanent partial disability and a 75% loss of wage-earning capacity. The claimant subsequently appealed this decision. Medical experts, including the claimant's treating physician, Clifford Ameduri, and an independent medical examiner, Guy Corkhill, consistently testified that the claimant was totally disabled and incapable of any gainful employment. Despite this overwhelming medical evidence, the Board concluded that the claimant could perform sedentary work. The appellate court reversed the Board's findings, determining that they were not supported by substantial evidence in the record. The court concluded that the evidence actually warranted a finding of a permanent total disability for the claimant.

Permanent Partial DisabilityLoss of Wage-Earning CapacitySpinal FusionSpinal Cord StimulatorMedical TestimonyIndependent Medical ExaminationSedentary WorkTotal DisabilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate Review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Martone v. Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority-Metro

In 2005 and 2007, a bus driver (claimant) suffered work-related neck and back injuries. Initially, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found him permanently totally disabled. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board modified this, determining he had a permanent partial disability with a 75% loss of wage-earning capacity based on medical evidence and other factors. The claimant appealed this decision, arguing a lack of substantial evidence for the partial disability finding. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, noting medical reports indicating submaximal efforts, high medication dosages, symptom magnification, and the ability to ambulate, which supported the finding of partial disability. The court also upheld the 75% loss of wage-earning capacity, finding it supported by substantial evidence after considering the claimant's impairment, work restrictions, age, education, and work experience.

Permanent Partial DisabilityWage-Earning CapacityChronic Pain SyndromeLumbar Spine SurgeryMedical EvidenceSubmaximal EffortsSymptom MagnificationAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionMedical Treatment Guidelines
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Phillips v. Elmira City School District

The Workers' Compensation Board's decision, finding the claimant to have a permanent partial disability and awarding compensation for lost wages after retirement, was affirmed on appeal. The claimant, a school custodian, suffered multiple injuries from a fall, leading to his classification as permanently partially disabled. The causal relationship between the accident and the disability inferred that his post-retirement wage loss was due to physical limitations. The employer failed to prove that the loss of employment was solely due to unrelated economic or other causes.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityLost WagesRetirement BenefitsCausally Related DisabilityAppellate DecisionAffirmed DecisionEmployer AppealMedical CausationEconomic Factors
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of LaClaire v. Birds Eye Foods, Inc.

Claimant sustained work-related injuries to her left and right knees in 2007. The Workers' Compensation Board subsequently determined that her condition warranted a marked permanent partial disability classification, entitling her to continuing disability benefits rather than a schedule loss of use award. The employer and its workers' compensation carrier appealed this determination. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence, including the claimant's orthopedic surgeon's testimony regarding crepitus, swelling, and severe pain, supported the marked permanent partial disability classification. Furthermore, the court concluded that the Board did not abuse its discretion in requiring additional proof concerning any overpayments made to the claimant.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilitySchedule Loss of UseKnee InjuriesAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceMedical OpinionCredibility AssessmentOverpaymentsDisability Benefits
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 7,528 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