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 Finocchio v. W. A. White Underwear Corp.

The claimant, a sewing machine operator, sustained an injury in 1955 and was later found to have a permanent partial disability in 1963. In 1974, her employer ceased operations, leading to an inability to find new work. The Workers’ Compensation Board awarded benefits for reduced earnings, determining she remained in the labor market. The employer appealed, arguing that the reduced earnings were solely due to economic conditions. The appellate court reversed the Board's decision, finding insufficient proof that the claimant’s disability contributed to her reduced earnings after her employer went out of business, and remitted the case for further findings on the cause of the reduced earnings.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityReduced EarningsEconomic ConditionsCausationBurden of ProofAppellate ReviewRemittalWorkers' Compensation Board
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of La Pietra v. County of Suffolk

The claimant, a licensed practical nurse, sustained an injury in 1989 and was later classified with a permanent partial disability, receiving workers' compensation benefits for reduced earnings. The Workers’ Compensation Board subsequently ruled that her reduced earnings were not causally related to her disability, primarily citing her current employment in Tennessee at what it inferred was a lower pay scale and fewer hours. The appellate court found that the Board failed to adequately explain its ruling and did not sufficiently consider all factors. Specifically, the court noted the absence of evidence comparing pay scales between New York and Tennessee, and the Board's failure to account for the claimant working fewer hours in Tennessee without determining if this reduction was self-imposed or unrelated to her disability. The court concluded there was insufficient support for the Board's finding that reduced earnings were solely due to economic conditions unrelated to the disability, thereby reversing the decision and remitting the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityReduced EarningsCausationEconomic ConditionsRemittalAppellate ReviewNew YorkLPNWage Loss
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gioia v. Cattaraugus County Nursing Home

The case involves an appeal from a Workers' Compensation Board decision regarding a claimant's reduced earnings award. The claimant, a nurse's aide with a permanent partial disability from a back injury, had her weekly compensation rate adjusted by the Board to be based on her actual reduced earnings from her current job, rather than her degree of disability. The employer and its workers' compensation carrier appealed, arguing that the Board should have considered the claimant's capacity to earn more. The court affirmed the Board's decision, reiterating that for claimants demonstrating labor market attachment, wage-earning capacity must be determined exclusively by actual earnings during disability, as evidence of capacity to earn more or less, including medical evidence of disability degree, is prohibited.

reduced earnings awardpermanent partial disabilitywage earning capacitylabor market attachmentactual earningsworkers' compensation lawappeal decisionjudicial reviewindependent medical examinationemployer appeal
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 17, 1977

Orbinati v. Utica Mutual Insurance

A claimant, employed as a physical education teacher and track/football coach by the Utica City School District, sustained an injury in August 1970. His average weekly wage was calculated to include his coaching stipend. Following his injury, he returned to his teaching role with restrictions that prevented him from coaching. Despite subsequent salary increments resulting in a higher overall salary than his pre-injury average weekly wage, the claimant contended he was experiencing reduced earnings due to the loss of his coaching allowance. The Workers’ Compensation Board and the referee affirmed there were no reduced earnings, concluding that his teaching and coaching constituted a single, integrated employment. This decision was subsequently affirmed without costs.

Workers' CompensationReduced EarningsAverage Weekly Wage CalculationDual EmploymentSingle EmploymentCoaching StipendUtica City School DistrictWorkers' Compensation LawAppellate DecisionInjury in Course of Employment
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Delee v. Crouse Hinds Division of Cooper Industries

Claimant sustained a work-related back injury in 1991, resulting in a permanent partial disability and workers' compensation benefits. After being terminated and later finding new employment, she developed breast cancer, leading to neuropathy and cardiomyopathy from chemotherapy, preventing her return to work. The employer's carrier argued her current inability to work was solely due to cancer, not the back injury. The Workers’ Compensation Board reversed a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge's decision, continuing claimant's reduced earnings award. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that supervening nonindustrial causes do not absolve an employer if the established permanent partial disability still contributes to reduced earning capacity, which is a factual determination for the Board, supported by substantial evidence in this case.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityReduced EarningsSupervening Nonindustrial CausesCausationAppellate ReviewMedical OpinionBack InjuryChemotherapy ComplicationsBoard Findings
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Virtuoso v. Chevrolet

The claimant sustained a work-related back injury and later lost employment with his employer due to a disagreement, not his injury. He subsequently received unemployment benefits and performed work for his wife's business. Despite claiming a worsening back condition limited his work ability, he was evasive about his income from these subsequent employments. The Workers' Compensation Board denied his claim for reduced earnings, finding no causal link between his lost employment income and his back condition, and noting his failure to provide income details. This appeal affirmed the Board's decision, concluding there was no evidence to warrant a reduced earnings award.

Workers' CompensationReduced EarningsWork-related InjuryCausationLoss of EmploymentIncome EvasionUnemployment BenefitsBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewAffirmation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 1999

Claim of Fisher v. Combined Life Insurance

In November 1995, the claimant suffered work-related injuries to his neck, back, and knee. He received workers' compensation benefits for total disability until January 5, 1996. Subsequently, the employer challenged his entitlement to partial disability benefits, asserting that the claimant had no reduced earnings after that date. The Workers' Compensation Board ultimately concluded that the claimant's wage earning capacity in 1996 surpassed his average weekly wage, thereby denying benefits post-January 5, 1996. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding sufficient evidence to support the factual determination that the claimant's 1996 income from self-employment constituted earnings rather than profits under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (5-a).

Workers' CompensationPartial DisabilityReduced EarningsWage Earning CapacitySelf-Employment IncomeProfits vs. EarningsBoard FindingsFactual IssuesCredibilityAppellate Review
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 06, 2002

Millner v. Cablevision

Claimant, a freelance news reporter, suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident on November 15, 1996, leading to a workers\' compensation claim and initial reduced earnings benefits from December 23, 1996. The Workers’ Compensation Board subsequently rescinded these awards for any period after February 1, 2000, determining that the reduction in claimant\'s work hours was not causally linked to her disability. Claimant appealed this decision, arguing for continued benefits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board\'s ruling, citing substantial evidence that the claimant\'s reduced work schedule stemmed from economic conditions in the job market rather than her disability, despite medical advice regarding work limitations. The court found no reason to disturb the Board\'s factual findings.

Workers\' CompensationReduced EarningsCausally Related DisabilityEconomic FactorsFreelance ReporterMotor Vehicle AccidentChiropractorMedical OpinionSubstantial EvidenceAppellate Review
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coyle v. Intermagnetics Corp.

The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that an unnamed claimant, who suffered work-related back injuries in 1985 and 1989, was entitled to reduced earnings benefits after taking a lower-paying job. The employer, Intermagnetics Corporation, and its workers’ compensation insurance carrier appealed, arguing the reduction in earnings was due to personal reasons, not disability. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence that the claimant's permanent partial disability was a contributing factor to the wage reduction, despite conflicting evidence. The ruling highlighted that physical limitations from a permanent partial disability allow for an inference of causation for subsequent wage loss.

Permanent Partial DisabilityReduced EarningsBack InjuryChiropractic TreatmentCausal RelationshipSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewWage LossEmployment ChangeMedical Testimony
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Burns v. Town of Colonie

Claimant, a police officer, suffered work-related injuries in 2000, leading to a permanent partial disability classification and workers’ compensation benefits. After settling a third-party negligence action in 2004, the employer's carrier accrued a credit, ceasing benefit payments to claimant. The claimant sought continued benefits, initially denied by a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge but later reversed by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding the carrier failed to prove that the claimant's reduced earning capacity was solely due to factors other than his disability, which was supported by his ongoing medical issues and testimony regarding work limitations.

Reduced Earnings BenefitsPermanent Partial DisabilityThird-Party Settlement CreditCarrier's Credit ExhaustionLabor Market AttachmentMedical ImpairmentAppellate AffirmationPolice Officer InjuryWorkers' Compensation Law § 29Disability Benefits
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 1,963 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