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 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. 533112
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 17, 2022

Matter of Reyes v. H & L Iron Works Corp.

A claimant appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision which found he violated Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a and permanently disqualified him from future indemnity benefits. The claimant, Leonel Reyes, sustained work-related injuries in 2016 and received benefits. However, he failed to fully disclose his disc jockey activities and the physical nature of this work to the Board, carrier, and examining physicians while collecting benefits. Surveillance videos showed him lifting heavy equipment, contradicting his testimony. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's finding of a violation and the imposition of both mandatory and discretionary penalties. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the violation and that the permanent forfeiture of indemnity benefits was not a disproportionate penalty given the claimant's multiple egregious misrepresentations.

Workers' Compensation Law § 114-aFalse RepresentationIndemnity BenefitsPermanent DisqualificationUndisclosed EmploymentDisc JockeyMaterial MisrepresentationSubstantial EvidenceWitness CredibilityDiscretionary Penalty
References
7
Case No. ADJ3134805 (BAK 0148440)
Regular
Feb 11, 2011

VELGRACE SMITH vs. KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

This case concerns a defendant seeking reconsideration of a decision that awarded a 15% increase in permanent disability indemnity payments. The administrative law judge (WCJ) found the employer failed to offer modified work within 60 days of the applicant's condition becoming permanent and stationary, as required by Labor Code section 4658(d)(2). The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the WCJ's literal interpretation of the statute would lead to absurd consequences given the retroactive nature of medical findings and delayed service of reports. The Board held the 60-day period begins when the employer has knowledge of both the permanent and stationary status and work restrictions, and remanded the case to determine if the employer's modified work offer remained consistent with updated restrictions.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityModified WorkLabor Code Section 4658(d)AggravationCumulative InjuryAgreed Medical EvaluatorPermanent and Stationary DateWork Restrictions
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration Between Cortland County & CSEA, Inc.

Petitioners, Cortland County Sheriff and Cortland County, were parties to a collective bargaining agreement with an unnamed respondent union. A correction officer, Lawrence Jackson, was placed on family and medical leave due to a work restriction related to plantar fasciitis, preventing him from working mandatory overtime. The respondent union filed a grievance alleging a violation of the CBA, which petitioners denied, leading the respondent to demand arbitration. Petitioners then sought to permanently stay arbitration, but the Supreme Court denied their application and compelled arbitration. On appeal, the court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, finding the dispute arbitrable as it related to the CBA's provisions on work schedules, overtime, and light-duty assignments, and no public policy considerations prohibited arbitration.

ArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementWork RestrictionMandatory OvertimeDisability BenefitsPlantar FasciitisGrievanceStay of ArbitrationAppellate ReviewPublic Employment
References
15
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. 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. ADJ8714466 & ADJ8128174
Regular
Mar 27, 2015

Christian Alegria vs. Laboratory Corporation of America, ACE American Insurance Company

Here's a concise summary for a lawyer: This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by Lab Corp and its insurer, ACE American Insurance, challenging a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) award of 25% permanent disability and medical treatment. The defendants argued the award was improperly based on work restrictions and that the Permanent Disability (PD) rating should have solely relied on Dr. Reynolds' report. The WCJ's report, adopted by the WCAB, denied reconsideration. The WCJ found evidence of work modifications and accommodated restrictions, and deemed both Dr. Newman's and Dr. Reynolds' reports substantial, justifying a rating based on the range of evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ ReportCumulative InjuryBilateral Upper ExtremitiesPermanent DisabilityPPDMedical TreatmentWork RestrictionsPanel QME
References
0
Case No. CV-24-1036
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 11, 2025

In the Matter of the Claim of Donna Brickner

Claimant Donna Brickner appealed a decision by the Workers' Compensation Board, which found she did not sustain a permanent total disability but rather a permanent partial disability of 90% following a work injury in 2019. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a permanent partial disability based on a carrier consultant's opinion that claimant was capable of sedentary work with significant restrictions. Claimant sought administrative review, arguing for a permanent total disability based on medical evidence. The Board affirmed its decision, relying on the claimant's treating physician's findings and the claimant's self-reported functional abilities, which indicated she was capable of greater activity than the carrier's consultant suggested, thus concluding there was insufficient credible medical evidence for a permanent total disability.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityPermanent Total DisabilityMedical EvidenceLumbar Spine InjuryChronic Pain SyndromeSedentary Work RestrictionsDisability AssessmentAdministrative ReviewAppellate Decision
References
6
Case No. CV-24-1036
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 11, 2025

Matter of Brickner v. Medtronic, Inc.

Claimant Donna Brickner appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision which ruled she did not sustain a permanent total disability following a 2019 work injury. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found a 90% permanent partial disability based on a carrier's consultant's opinion that claimant was capable of sedentary work with restrictions. Brickner sought administrative review, arguing for a permanent total disability. The Board affirmed, citing insufficient credible medical evidence for total disability, relying on the treating physician's report and claimant's self-reported functional abilities indicating greater activity than a total disability. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that substantial evidence supported the conclusion that claimant did not have a permanent total disability.

Permanent DisabilityTotal DisabilityPartial DisabilityMedical EvidenceAppellate ReviewLabor Market AttachmentSpinal InjuryChronic PainSedentary WorkFunctional Abilities
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Rosario v. AIG

Claimant, an accountant, ceased working in 1998 and later applied for workers' compensation benefits for repetitive strain injuries, with the claim established in 2001 for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. In 2006, the parties stipulated that claimant was permanently partially disabled. The employer's carrier subsequently sought to determine if claimant was actively seeking employment within her medical restrictions. Initially, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge denied the application to suspend benefits, finding no voluntary withdrawal from the labor market. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed this, concluding claimant had voluntarily withdrawn by failing to search for work within her medical restrictions. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial evidence that the claimant admitted to not searching for work for an extended period, despite being capable of performing sedentary work.

Workers' CompensationVoluntary WithdrawalLabor Market AttachmentPermanent Partial DisabilityCarpal Tunnel SyndromeRepetitive Motion InjurySedentary WorkEmployment SearchBoard DecisionAppeal
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 10,415 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