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. ADJ488924 (SDO 0329999), ADJ226519 (SDO 0302236), ADJ2353553 (SDO 0250184), ADJ4021935 (SDO 0269434)
Regular
Dec 10, 2020

Craig Stevens vs. Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a previous order denying benefits from the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF). Applicant Craig Stevens sought SIBTF benefits for a claimed subsequent cumulative trauma injury to his neck ending April 2, 2009, with a compensable consequence injury to his right shoulder and low back. The WCAB found the medical evidence regarding the causation, date of injury, and permanent disability ratings for the alleged subsequent injuries, as well as prior injuries, to be insufficient and inconsistent. The case was returned to the trial level for further development of the record, including obtaining new medical opinions to clarify the various injuries and establish SIBTF eligibility thresholds.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundSIBTF eligibilitycumulative trauma injurycompensable consequence injurypermanent disabilityapportionmentmedical evidencecausationfurther development of the recordLabor Code section 4751
References
9
Case No. ADJ3953602 (SRO 0260827) ADJ2646453 (SRO 0133845)
Regular
Nov 14, 2012

ROBERTO HERNANDEZ vs. MILL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) seeks reconsideration of an award finding the applicant totally permanently disabled due to industrial injuries sustained in 2004. The WCJ found the combined injuries greater than 70% and the second injury itself greater than 35%, entitling the applicant to SIBTF benefits. SIBTF argues the applicant's disability is solely due to the subsequent injury, thus disqualifying them from SIBTF benefits. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the admissibility of two vocational reports and deposition transcripts, Exhibits M and N, which were previously marked for identification only. The Board intends to receive these documents into evidence unless timely objections are filed.

SIBTFPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityIndustrial InjuryVocational Rehabilitation EvaluationDiminished Future Earning CapacityDeposition TranscriptExhibits M and NWCJ Report
References
0
Case No. ADJ1916556 (RIV 0038645) ADJ2708670 (ANA 0358650)
Regular
Nov 15, 2013

GHEORGHE TOMA vs. BASIC ELECTRIC, INC.; SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) successfully petitioned for reconsideration, overturning a previous finding that the applicant was eligible for SIBTF benefits. The Board determined that the applicant did not qualify because the WCJ improperly considered disability arising from the natural progression of a prior injury after a subsequent injury. SIBTF liability is based solely on the disability level at the time of the subsequent injury, which was 32% in this case. Consequently, the applicant was found not qualified for SIBTF benefits.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundLabor Code section 4751permanent disabilitycumulative traumaspecific injuryPetition to ReopenAgreed Medical Examinerapportionmentnew and further disabilityHaendiges v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
2
Case No. ADJ7917795
Regular
May 16, 2014

SANDRA DELGADO vs. KAISER PERMANENTE, PERMANENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, rescinded the previous award, and returned the case for further proceedings. The WCAB found that the administrative law judge's (ALJ) finding of 100% permanent disability was not supported by substantial medical evidence. Furthermore, it was unclear if the subsequent injury solely caused the increased disability given stipulations regarding a prior injury's worsening. The WCAB directed the ALJ to ensure a proper record and make specific findings on all disputed issues, including permanent disability, the subsequent injury's contribution, and potential SIBTF credits.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentSubstantial Medical EvidenceLabor Code section 4753Agreed Medical EvaluatorWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
8
Case No. ADJ3953602 (SRO 0133844) ADJ2646453 (SRO 0133845)
Regular
Dec 21, 2012

ROBERTO HERNANDEZ vs. MILL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed an earlier decision awarding applicant 100% permanent disability, less credits and fees, due to industrial injuries to his right knee, psyche, and lumbar spine. The Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) sought reconsideration, arguing the applicant's disability was solely from the latter injury and thus not eligible for SIBTF benefits. The Board accepted the applicant's late-filed answer to the SIBTF's petition and, agreeing with the original judge, denied the SIBTF's petition for reconsideration. The Board also admitted two exhibits previously marked for identification into evidence.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUNDRECONSIDERATIONFINDINGS AND AWARDPERMANENT DISABILITYINDUSTRIAL INJURYPSYCHELUMBAR SPINEMAINTENANCE WORKERADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
References
2
Case No. ADJ1279352
Regular
Nov 18, 2010

WARREN BARNA vs. PACIFIC TUBE, ST. PAUL TRAVELERS, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

The Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) sought reconsideration of an award finding them liable for an applicant's psychiatric injury. The applicant had previously settled orthopedic claims and a cumulative trauma claim. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the original decision, adding specific findings required by Labor Code section 4751 regarding the applicant's pre-existing psychiatric disability and the compensable industrial psychiatric injury. The Board affirmed the original finding of liability against the SIBTF, while clarifying the applicant's eligibility for SIBTF benefits and addressing the issue of potential offsets.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fundpsychiatric disabilitypre-existing disabilityindustrial injurypermanent partial disabilityLabor Code section 4751Workers' Compensation Appeals Boardreconsiderationcumulative traumaspecific injury
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 1988

Calhoun v. Big Apple Wrecking Corp.

The defendant, Big Apple Wrecking Corporation, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, which denied their motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action. The underlying injury occurred at a construction site, and the Workers' Compensation Board had previously determined the injury was work-related, providing benefits to the plaintiff's decedent. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, granting summary judgment and dismissing the complaint against Big Apple Wrecking Corporation. The court emphasized that workers' compensation benefits serve as the exclusive remedy for employees injured by co-workers in the same employ, citing Workers’ Compensation Law. Furthermore, the court reiterated that determinations made by the Workers' Compensation Board on questions of fact, including employer-employee relationships, are final and binding under principles of res judicata.

Personal InjurySummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation ExclusivityRes JudicataAppellate ReviewEmployer-Employee RelationshipConstruction Site InjuryNew York LawExclusive RemedyAdministrative Determinations
References
6
Case No. ADJ9171432
Regular
Apr 25, 2016

Kenneth Evanoff vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES BENEFITS TRUST FUND

This case involves an applicant seeking reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The applicant, previously awarded 96% permanent disability for a 2007 injury, suffered a subsequent injury in 2012 resulting in prostate cancer. The initial award used the Combined Values Chart to calculate the combined disability at 98%, entitling him to benefits from the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF). The applicant argues the trial judge erred by using the Combined Values Chart and seeks to simply add the disability percentages, leading to a 100% combined disability. The Board granted reconsideration, finding that in the absence of overlapping disabilities, the disabilities should be added, entitling the applicant to a 100% permanent disability rating and remanding for a new award.

Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust FundSIBTFCumulative Trauma InjuryPermanent DisabilityCombined Values ChartLabor Code section 4664(c)(1)(G)Whole Person ImpairmentWPIDate of InjuryDate of Knowledge
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2002

Claim of Ostuni v. Town of Ramapo

Claimant appealed from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed July 22, 2002, which denied her application for reconsideration and/or full Board review of a prior decision. The prior decision had ruled that claimant did not sustain a work-related injury, citing insufficient credible evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's denial, finding that the Board fully considered all evidence and no new, previously unavailable evidence was offered to warrant altering its decision. Furthermore, the court found substantial evidence supported the Board’s September 2001 decision that claimant’s injuries were not compensable, as her recurring lower back pain stemmed from injuries predating or following the alleged November 1990 incident, rather than the incident itself. The court also upheld the Board's rejection of contrary testimony as not credible.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryWork-Related InjuryReconsiderationBoard ReviewAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionArbitrary and CapriciousSubstantial EvidenceMedical Testimony
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lewis v. Toring Taxi Co.

This memorandum affirms the Appellate Division's order concerning a claimant's injury. The central issue examined was whether the claimant's injury arose out of and in the course of employment, which the board had previously determined in the negative as a question of fact. The court found no legal basis to overturn this determination, stating that substantial evidence supported the board's finding, referencing *Matter of McGrinder v Sullivan*. Consequently, the court upheld the board's decision.

Employment InjuryQuestion of Fact ReviewSubstantial Evidence DoctrineAppellate Division AffirmanceCourse of Employment DeterminationAdministrative Board DecisionJudicial ConcurrenceLegal Memorandum
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 14,122 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