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. 04-06-00237-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 30, 2007

Braulio Lara v. Weeks Marine, Inc.

Braulio Lara, a deckhand for Weeks Marine, Inc., appealed a judgment rendered in his favor based on claims under the Jones Act and for maintenance and cure, specifically challenging the jury's failure to award damages for past physical pain and suffering after he sustained a fractured left shoulder in a fall. Lara reported immediate pain, and medical evidence from Dr. Fitter and Dr. Donovan confirmed a painful shoulder fracture, with Dr. Donovan also diagnosing ruptured discs in the neck and back. Despite these objective injuries and awarded medical expenses, the jury awarded zero for past physical pain. The appellate court reviewed the factual sufficiency of the evidence, finding the jury's failure to award damages for past physical pain and suffering to be against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence, especially given the undisputed objective evidence of a significant injury. Consequently, the judgment of the trial court was reversed, and the cause was remanded for a new trial.

Jones ActMaintenance and CureMaritime LawPersonal InjuryNegligenceShoulder FracturePain and Suffering DamagesFactual SufficiencyJury VerdictMedical Expenses
References
10
Case No. 2017-08-1047
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 29, 2018

Parker, Donna v. Northgate Veterinary Hospital, LLC

Donna Parker, a kennel manager, sustained a head and shoulder injury after tripping at work. She was diagnosed with a displaced shoulder fracture and head contusions. Despite reporting ongoing headaches, memory loss, and confusion, her authorized physician, Dr. Grinspun, did not refer her to a neurologist. Ms. Parker sought neurological treatment through an expedited hearing, arguing the symptoms stemmed from her work injury. The Court, however, denied her request, stating that while her testimony was credible, she failed to provide sufficient expert medical proof to establish a likelihood of prevailing on the merits for entitlement to neurological treatment.

Workers' CompensationExpedited HearingNeurological TreatmentShoulder InjuryHead InjuryMedical NecessityExpert Medical ProofEmployee TestimonyMaximum Medical ImprovementCognitive Issues
References
5
Case No. 2018-08-1044
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 28, 2019

Sprague, Susan v. Bartlett City Schools

Susan Sprague, a Special Education Teacher’s Assistant for Bartlett City Schools, sustained a right shoulder injury on January 30, 2018, after falling off a ladder. Orthopedist Dr. Mark Harriman diagnosed a dislocated shoulder and humerus fracture, assigning an eight percent permanent impairment to the body as a whole. The core legal issue revolved around the proper calculation of her average weekly wage (AWW) for permanent partial disability. Ms. Sprague argued for a 42-week divisor, excluding summer breaks, while Bartlett Schools contended for a 52-week divisor. The Court ruled that Ms. Sprague's ten weeks off for summer break was a "recognized incident of her regular employment" and not a "fortuitous circumstance," thus confirming the 52-week calculation. Consequently, her average weekly wage was determined to be $468.34, resulting in a compensation rate of $312.23 and a permanent partial disability award of $11,240.28.

Average Weekly Wage CalculationPermanent Partial DisabilityShoulder InjurySchool EmployeeSeasonal EmploymentSummer BreakVoluntary AbsencesFortuitous CircumstanceWorkers' Compensation BenefitsMedical Impairment Rating
References
4
Case No. 2016-03-0400
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 2016

Dunn, Jason v. United States Infrastructure

Jason Dunn, a utility worker for United States Infrastructure (USI), injured his right shoulder in October 2014. After multiple surgeries and physical therapy for his right shoulder, he began experiencing left shoulder problems in February 2015, which his authorized physician, Dr. Eric A. Morgan, diagnosed as an over-compensation injury related to the original right shoulder injury. Dr. Morgan recommended left shoulder surgery, which utilization review approved but Liberty Mutual denied. An independent medical evaluation by Dr. Edward Kahn concluded the left shoulder injury was age-related and not caused by the work incident. The Court weighed the conflicting medical opinions, giving greater weight to Dr. Morgan's opinion due to his greater contact with Mr. Dunn, and found that Mr. Dunn is likely to prevail on the merits, granting his request for left shoulder surgery.

Shoulder InjuryOvercompensation InjuryMedical BenefitsCausationConflicting Medical OpinionsExpedited HearingPreponderance of EvidenceDirect and Natural Consequences RuleMedical Treatment AuthorizationUtilization Review
References
7
Case No. ADJ1498961
Regular
Sep 23, 2010

DALE ARNOLD vs. RALPH'S AKA KROGER

This case involves an applicant's claim for workers' compensation benefits for a right shoulder injury. While the initial award recognized industrial injury to the applicant's left shoulder, right elbow, and right forearm, the defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the right shoulder injury was not work-related. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the applicant failed to meet the burden of proof for the right shoulder injury. They disagreed with the primary treating physician's opinion and found the agreed medical evaluator's opinion more persuasive, ultimately reversing the finding for the right shoulder.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardCumulative TraumaIndustrial InjuryLeft ShoulderRight ElbowRight ForearmRight ShoulderPrimary Treating Physician
References
0
Case No. 2023-03-8156
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 13, 2024

Sullivan, Leah v. Petree Arbor Lawn & Landscape, Inc.

This interlocutory appeal concerns an employee's request for medical evaluation and treatment of a left shoulder condition, which the employer contested as not part of her accepted work-related injuries. Following a work accident, Leah Sullivan received treatment for her neck, chest, and right shoulder, but her request for left shoulder treatment was denied by Petree Arbor Lawn & Landscape, Inc. The trial court ordered the employer to provide the requested medical care, a decision subsequently affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. The Board ruled that an employee is not obligated to identify every injury at the time of initial notice and that the employer's expert had not fully evaluated the left shoulder. Consequently, the case was remanded, upholding the order for the employer to authorize a left shoulder evaluation by Dr. Holloway.

Workers' CompensationMedical TreatmentLeft Shoulder InjuryCausationNotice of InjuryExpedited HearingTrial Court OrderAppeals BoardEmployer LiabilityMedical Evaluation
References
5
Case No. SFO 0425862 SFO 0425863
Regular
May 14, 2008

William Bishop vs. IGC POLYCOLD SYSTEMS, ROYAL & SUN ALLIANCE

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant claiming injury to his right shoulder and seeking a new vocational rehabilitation plan. The Appeals Board affirmed the WCJ's denial of a new vocational plan and the finding of no industrial injury to the right shoulder. However, they reversed the WCJ to award benefits resulting from right shoulder surgery, deeming it a consequence of the compensable left shoulder injury.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationVocational Rehabilitation PlanIndustrial InjuryRight ShoulderLeft ShoulderTemporary DisabilityQualified Medical EvaluationCausationNon-Industrial
References
8
Case No. 2021-06-0468
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 17, 2021

Walker, Dionnie v. Clarksville Dep’t of Electricity

Dionnie Walker sought medical benefits and temporary disability for a left shoulder injury, which she claimed resulted from overusing her left arm after a right shoulder injury while working for the Clarksville Department of Electricity. The employer argued the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and lacked medical proof connecting the left shoulder injury to work. The Court found the statute of limitations had not run but denied relief, stating Ms. Walker failed to provide sufficient medical evidence to prove her left shoulder condition was primarily work-related or a direct consequence of her compensable right shoulder injury. The Court acknowledged Ms. Walker's testimony regarding the employer's failure to accommodate was credible and her theory plausible, but emphasized the need for expert medical testimony. The case is set for a status hearing, and the denial does not prevent Ms. Walker from seeking further evidence.

Expedited HearingStatute of Limitations DefenseLeft Shoulder Injury ClaimRight Shoulder InjuryMedical CausationTemporary Disability BenefitsMedical Proof InsufficiencyWork-RelatednessEmployer Non-AccommodationPhysician Assistant Assessment
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Marta Vandall v. Aurora Healthcare, LLC d/b/a Allenbrooke Nursing & Rehab

Employee Marta Vandall fell while working for Allenbrooke Nursing and Rehab, sustaining a shoulder fracture. The employer contended the injury was an idiopathic fall and did not arise out of her employment. The trial court found Ms. Vandall met her burden of proving the injury arose from her employment and awarded workers' compensation benefits. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, deferring to its credibility findings regarding the presence of an employment hazard, and resolving doubts in favor of the employee.

References
13
Case No. 2021-06-1105
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 06, 2023

Hernandez, Andres v. SMS, Inc., d/b/a Master Stucco

Andres Hernandez, an employee, suffered a left shoulder fracture after falling from scaffolding at a Master Stucco jobsite. The central issue in the expedited hearing was whether Mr. Hernandez was an employee or an independent contractor. The Court determined that Mr. Hernandez was likely to prevail in proving his employee status, thereby requiring Master Stucco to provide reasonable and necessary medical treatment for his injury. However, his requests for temporary disability benefits and past medical expenses were denied at this time due to insufficient admissible proof of wages and medical bills. The case is set for a status hearing on June 19, 2023.

Employee statusIndependent contractorWorkers' compensationMedical benefitsTemporary disabilityShoulder fractureConstruction injuryUndocumented workersEmployer controlScaffolding fall
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 1,432 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