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. 2016-05-0666
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 18, 2017

Batey, Christopher v. Deliver This, Inc.

Christopher Batey, a delivery driver, sustained a spinal injury in 2015. He sought permanent total disability (PTD) or permanent partial disability (PPD) benefits from his employer, Deliver This, Inc., and its insurer, Auto Owners Insurance Company. The court denied his claim for PTD benefits, finding he was not totally incapacitated from all work. However, the court granted Mr. Batey's claim for extraordinary relief under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-242, awarding him 275 weeks of PPD benefits due to permanent restrictions and his inability to perform his pre-injury occupation. The employer was also ordered to provide a new panel of orthopedists for future medical benefits.

Permanent Partial DisabilityMedical BenefitsVocational DisabilitySpinal InjuryL5-S1 Disc HerniationMedical ImpairmentExtraordinary ReliefReturn to WorkEmployment RestrictionsTennessee Workers' Compensation
References
2
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 05367 [174 AD3d 1017]
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 03, 2019

Matter of City of Plattsburgh (Plattsburgh Permanent Firemen's Assn.)

The City of Plattsburgh, the appellant, appealed an order from the Supreme Court that denied its application to permanently stay arbitration with the Plattsburgh Permanent Firemen's Association. The dispute originated from a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) which stipulated a minimum staffing level of 36 firefighters and prohibited layoffs. When a firefighter retired, reducing the staff to 35, the City refused to fill the vacancy, citing financial reasons, leading the Firemen's Association to demand arbitration. The Supreme Court denied the City's application to stay arbitration and granted the Association's motion to compel. The Appellate Division reversed this decision, ruling that the disputed CBA provision was a job security clause. The court found that this clause did not explicitly demonstrate the City's intent to waive its right to reduce staffing for budgetary or economic reasons, thus violating public policy and rendering the dispute non-arbitrable. A concurring opinion further noted that the clause also violated public policy due to its unreasonable duration.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementJob Security ClausePublic PolicyStaffing LevelsFirefighters UnionBudgetary ConstraintsAppellate DivisionCPLR Article 75Stay Arbitration
References
8
Case No. 2015-01-0149
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 04, 2016

Ringer, Lamar v. Welding Ceramics, Inc.

Lamar Ringer, a press operator, injured his neck, left shoulder, and arm at Welding Ceramics, Inc. on November 19, 2014. He sought treatment, including from orthopedic surgeon Dr. Jay E. Jolley, II, who diagnosed a large C5/C6 disc herniation and recommended surgery, which Ringer declined. Dr. Jolley rated Ringer's impairment at 6% to the whole body and released him to regular duty, but Ringer experienced increased pain upon returning to work. Another physician, Dr. Jerry L. Smith, rated Ringer's impairment at 10% and placed permanent restrictions. The court found Dr. Jolley's impairment rating methodology incorrect due to documented radicular symptoms and accepted Dr. Smith's 10% rating, awarding permanent partial disability benefits. The court denied additional temporary disability benefits, finding Ringer reached maximum medical improvement, and also denied his request for a new treating physician panel.

Permanent Partial DisabilityImpairment RatingAMA Guides Sixth EditionRadiculopathyDisc HerniationAuthorized Treating PhysicianRebuttal of PresumptionTemporary Disability BenefitsChange of Physician PanelFunctional Capacity Evaluation
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2001

In re the Claim of Barager-Dieter v. Kelly Temporary Services

In this appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, the court affirmed a ruling that the claimant had sustained a permanent partial disability of moderate severity. The claimant reported arm injuries in 1992 due to production work. The Board's determination, which was based on the testimony and report of orthopedic surgeon Matthew Landfried, found sufficient evidence despite conflicting medical opinions. Landfried diagnosed accumulative trauma syndrome, performed multiple surgeries, and placed the claimant under permanent lifting and repetitive activity restrictions. The court upheld the Board's resolution of conflicting medical proof in the claimant's favor, concluding that substantial evidence supported the award.

permanent partial disabilityaccumulative trauma syndromecarpal tunnel surgeryulnar nerve transpositionmedical evidence conflictworkers' compensation appealappellate affirmancelifting restrictionsrepetitive strain injuryorthopedic diagnosis
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. 2016-05-0277
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 18, 2016

Harrison, James v. General Motors. Inc.

Employee James Harrison sought permanent total disability (PTD) benefits for a right shoulder injury sustained on October 24, 2014, during his employment with General Motors, LLC. The Court analyzed differing vocational expert opinions, with Mr. Harrison's expert arguing for 100% incapacity based on FCE results and prior wrist restrictions, while GM's expert cited 75-85% vocational disability based on Dr. McCall's permanent shoulder restrictions, considering Mr. Harrison's unimpaired left arm. The Court dismissed restrictions not explicitly assigned by a physician and found Ms. Bramlett's vocational methodology, which considered the left arm, more persuasive. Ultimately, the Court denied PTD benefits, concluding Mr. Harrison did not meet his burden of proof, but awarded him permanent partial disability benefits of $18,545.76 and continued medical treatment for the injury.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityShoulder InjuryVocational AssessmentFunctional Capacity EvaluationMedical RestrictionsImpairment RatingOccupational DisabilityRight Arm InjuryEmployment Law
References
8
Case No. 2019-01-0366
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 29, 2021

Lewallen, Denise v. Home Healthcare of East Tennessee, Inc.

Ms. Denise R. Lewallen sought permanent total disability benefits after sustaining multiple physical injuries in a motor vehicle accident while working for Home Healthcare of East Tennessee, Inc. The employer disputed her entitlement to permanent total disability benefits, a hernia claim, and an alleged mental injury (PTSD). Medical examinations by Dr. Scott Smith and Dr. Paul Johnson confirmed significant impairments and restrictions, with Dr. Smith ultimately adopting permanent light-duty restrictions. Ms. Lewallen's credible testimony regarding her inability to work due to pain and physical limitations was considered. The Court found Ms. Lewallen permanently and totally disabled, granting her permanent total disability benefits and denying her hernia and PTSD claims.

Permanent Total DisabilityMotor Vehicle AccidentOrthopedic InjuriesCervical Disc HerniationPTSD ClaimHernia ClaimMedical Impairment RatingFunctional Capacity EvaluationVocational DisabilityCertified Nursing Assistant
References
7
Case No. 2017-02-0604
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 10, 2018

Hughes, James v. Kennametal, Inc.

James Hughes sustained a work-related lung injury on June 13, 2016, while employed by Kennametal, Inc., after inhaling hydrogen chloride. The authorized physician, Dr. Jeff Farrow, assigned a 20% permanent impairment rating and extensive permanent restrictions, including environmental limitations. Hughes sought permanent total disability benefits, arguing his condition rendered him unable to maintain employment due to unreliable attendance. Vocational experts provided differing assessments of his vocational disability, ranging from 50% to 63%. However, the Court found Hughes failed to establish total incapacitation from working at any income-generating job, partly due to his lack of effort in seeking alternative employment within his restrictions. Consequently, the Court denied his claim for permanent total disability benefits but awarded permanent partial disability benefits of $51,066.93, after accounting for a temporary total disability overpayment.

Lung injuryPermanent partial disabilityVocational assessmentMedical restrictionsHydrogen chloride exposureWorkers' compensation claimsDisability benefitsEmployment limitationsMMI determinationTennessee law
References
4
Case No. ADJ8641626
Regular
Oct 06, 2014

SYLVIA ESPINOZA vs. SALINAS VALLEY MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE

This case concerns whether an employer's offer of work triggers a decrease in permanent disability benefits. The applicant initially became permanent and stationary (P&S) in November 2012, and the employer made a timely offer of regular work. However, the applicant's condition later worsened, and she was declared P&S again in July 2013 with new restrictions. The Appeals Board found that while the applicant did not qualify for an increase in benefits, the employer could not rely on the prior offer for a decrease because her condition and restrictions had significantly changed. Therefore, no adjustment to the permanent disability rate was applied.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardSylvia EspinozaSalinas Valley Memorial HealthcareAcclamation Insurance Management ServicesPermanent and Stationary (P&S) reportLabor Code section 4658(d)(3)(A)Agreed Medical Examiner (AME)Robert SteinerM.D.permanent disability rate
References
4
Case No. ADJ2419784 (LBO 0367096)
Regular
Oct 02, 2012

ANTHONY DE FAZIO vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration to review the apportionment of permanent disability awards for applicant Anthony De Fazio. Applicant sustained three separate industrial injuries in 2002, 2003, and 2004, resulting in distinct permanent disability ratings. Applicant argued that all permanent disability should be awarded as a single lump sum due to intertwined work restrictions, citing *Benson v. Permanente Medical Group*. The WCAB rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the trial level. This was done to allow for new rating instructions that would apply the "common restriction" to each injury, with a specific instruction for the workers' compensation judge to consider any overlap in disability.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAnthony De FazioLos Angeles Unified School DistrictSedgwick CMSReconsiderationJoint Findings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentBenson v. Permanente Medical GroupIndustrial Injuries
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 6,083 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