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 Anderson v. New York City Department of Design & Construction

Claimant appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision from April 25, 2013, which denied his application to include a partial right rotator cuff tear under his existing 2002 work-related injury claim. The Board found that claimant failed to establish a causal link between the 2002 automobile accident and the 2009 rotator cuff tear, despite the opinion of his orthopedist. The orthopedist acknowledged that age-related degeneration could cause such tears independently of trauma. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding there was substantial evidence to support the finding that the orthopedist's testimony did not convincingly prove a causal relationship.

Rotator cuff tearCausal relationshipWorkers' CompensationMedical evidenceDisabilityWork-related injuryAutomobile accidentShoulder painOrthopedist opinionSubstantial evidence
References
4
Case No. 518426
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 02, 2014

MatterofAndersonvNewYorkCityDepartmentofDesign&Construction

Donald Anderson, the claimant, sought workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained in a 2002 work-related automobile accident. Initially, his claim was established for neck and back injuries, but in 2005, the Workers' Compensation Board determined he had no continuing disability, noting he was magnifying symptoms. In 2009, Anderson was diagnosed with a partial right rotator cuff tear, which he sought to include under his existing claim, alleging a causal link to the 2002 accident. The Board denied this application, finding a lack of established causal relationship. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that Anderson failed to present convincing evidence from his orthopedist or any other proof to establish the necessary causal connection between the 2002 accident and his right rotator cuff tear.

Workers' CompensationCausally Related InjuryRotator Cuff TearAutomobile AccidentMedical EvidenceDisability BenefitsAppellate ReviewShoulder InjurySubstantial EvidenceCausation
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Rotating Components, Inc. & District 4, International Union of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO

Petitioner moved to confirm an arbitration award, while Respondent cross-moved to vacate it, alleging imperfect execution and lack of a mutual, final, and definite award. The dispute arose from a collective bargaining agreement from December 1959, and a supplementary agreement from January 1960, which stipulated the assignment of the main agreement to a local union within 18 months, with arbitration if the assignment failed. The arbitrator issued an interim award on September 21, 1961, instructing the union to assign the agreement within 30 days. Upon the union's failure, the arbitrator, on October 29, 1961, assigned the agreement to a new local union to be formed for the employees of Rotating Components, Inc. The court found the arbitrator's award to be within his express powers and rejected the objection regarding the finality and definiteness of the award. Consequently, the court granted the petitioner's motion to confirm the award and denied the respondent's cross-motion to vacate it.

Arbitration AwardCollective BargainingUnion AssignmentContract DisputeMotion to ConfirmMotion to VacateLabor DisputeJudicial ReviewInterim AwardFinality of Award
References
2
Case No. LAO 854789
Regular
Oct 09, 2007

Juana Manriquez vs. KENVIN, INC., dba CORDOVAN & GREY LTD, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The applicant sought extended temporary disability benefits, claiming a rotator cuff debridement during shoulder arthroscopy constituted an "amputation" under Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C). The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the WCJ's finding that "debridement" of an internal body part, like bone, does not meet the statutory definition of amputation. This definition requires the severance or removal of a limb or body appendage, conforming to the common understanding of the term.

Juana ManriquezKenvin IncState Compensation Insurance FundLAO 854789Petition for ReconsiderationAugust 6 2007 Findings and Ordershoulder arthroscopyamputationLabor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C)temporary disability
References
4
Case No. ADJ2934117 (STK 0214084)
Regular
Jun 06, 2011

BENNIE MADAVE vs. STOCKTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

This case involves an applicant seeking workers' compensation for a right shoulder rotator cuff repair surgery denied by a WCJ. The WCJ ruled the need for surgery stemmed from a subsequent non-industrial accident, not the initial industrial injury. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original order, and returned the case for further medical record development. This is because the medical evidence failed to definitively determine if the surgery was necessary to cure or relieve the effects of the industrial injury, even if the tear itself wasn't solely industrially caused.

Rotator cuff repairIndustrial injuryNon-industrial accidentUtilization reviewPanel Qualified Medical EvaluatorPQMEApportionmentPermanent disabilityInextricably linkedFurther development of medical record
References
1
Case No. ADJ1313860
Regular
Mar 07, 2017

Kevin Voelker vs. D. Frey Plastering Co., State Compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant challenging an Independent Medical Review (IMR) determination that denied authorization for shoulder surgery. The applicant argued the IMR incorrectly applied guidelines for acromioplasty/impingement syndrome instead of guidelines for a rotator cuff tear, which was the actual condition for which surgery was requested. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the IMR's determination was based on a plainly erroneous mistake of fact readily apparent from the submitted records, not requiring expert opinion. Consequently, the Board rescinded the IMR determination and remanded the matter for a new IMR process.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndependent Medical ReviewPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderPlainly Erroneous Finding of FactMedical Treatment Utilization ScheduleRequest for AuthorizationRotator Cuff TearAcromioplastyImpingement Syndrome
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 05, 2004

Elescano v. Eighth-19th Co.

A construction worker sued for personal injuries, including a ruptured rotator cuff requiring extensive physical therapy and surgery. The Supreme Court, New York County, awarded $100,000 for past pain and suffering and $50,000 for future pain and suffering. On appeal, the award for future pain and suffering was deemed materially deviating from reasonable compensation. The judgment was unanimously modified to vacate the future pain and suffering award and direct a new trial on that issue, unless the third-party defendant stipulates to increase the award to $200,000, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Personal InjuryConstruction AccidentRotator Cuff InjuryPain and Suffering AwardFuture DamagesDamages AssessmentAppellate ReviewJudgment ModificationNew Trial OrderedConditional Affirmance
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 08, 2011

Guallpa v. Key Fat Corp.

The defendant appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered June 8, 2011, which awarded the plaintiff substantial damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff, a construction worker, sustained an ankle fracture, herniated disc, and rotator cuff injury after falling from a ladder in 2006, requiring multiple surgeries. The Supreme Court had granted the plaintiff summary judgment on liability, and a jury determined the damages. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding the jury's awards for past/future pain and suffering, lost earnings, and future medical expenses to be reasonable and not speculative, thus rejecting the defendant's challenges.

Personal InjuryConstruction Site AccidentFall from HeightLadder InjuryDamages AssessmentJury AwardAppellate AffirmationSummary Judgment LiabilityPain and Suffering DamagesLost Earnings Damages
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Baker v. Weyerhaeuser

Claimant, a long-term corrugated cardboard plant worker, developed shoulder pain in August 2002 after years of strenuous physical exertion involving heavy loads. He was diagnosed with a torn rotator cuff and a herniated cervical disc, leading to a workers' compensation claim. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board established occupational disease, notice, and causal relationship, with a disablement date of September 9, 2002. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's factual findings regarding the link between the claimant's condition and his occupation, and that proper notice was given to the employer.

occupational diseaseworkers' compensation benefitstorn rotator cuffherniated cervical discstrenuous physical exertioncausal relationshipnotice requirementappellate reviewsubstantial evidencedisablement date
References
5
Case No. 534536
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 09, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Wesley Harmon

The claimant, Wesley Harmon, appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision that determined a 20% schedule loss of use (SLU) of his left arm and reduced his counsel's fee. The Board had credited the opinion of his treating orthopedist, Dr. John Goldblatt, over the employer's independent medical examiner, Dr. Frederick Kaempffe, regarding the SLU percentage, and adjusted Goldblatt's calculation by removing a 10% addition for a rotator cuff tear based on current guidelines. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that its resolution of conflicting medical evidence was supported by substantial evidence and that its exercise of discretion in awarding counsel fees was not arbitrary or capricious.

Schedule Loss of UseLeft Shoulder InjuryRotator Cuff TearMaximum Medical ImprovementWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionMedical Evidence EvaluationAppellate DivisionCounsel FeesIndependent Medical ExamOrthopedic Impairment
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 49 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