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
Jan 24, 2005

Claim of Jones v. New York State Department of Correction

The claimant, a bus driver for the New York City Department of Correction, sustained work-related injuries to her right shoulder and back in September 1998. After surgery in 1999, she sought treatment in 2001 for left shoulder pain, alleging it was a consequential injury from favoring her right shoulder. While a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found a causally related consequential injury, the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing the Board's authority to make its own factual findings and resolve conflicting medical evidence. The Board found the self-insured employer’s medical consultant more credible than the claimant’s physician, and its decision was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' Compensation Board DecisionAppellate DivisionCausal RelationshipConsequential InjuryCredibility of WitnessesConflicting Medical EvidenceShoulder InjuriesBus DriverNew York City Department of CorrectionAffirmed Decision
References
3
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The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded a previous order denying benefits from the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF).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. 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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 07, 2004

Claim of Senecal v. Allied Bendix

Claimant sustained a work-related left shoulder injury in 1991, leading to surgery in 1992 and retirement in 1995. In 2002, he sought workers' compensation benefits for a consequential right shoulder injury, claiming it resulted from favoring his left shoulder. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially established a causally related consequential injury, a Board panel reversed this decision. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's ruling, finding substantial evidence that the right shoulder condition, which manifested 10-11 years post-initial injury and 7 years post-retirement, was consistent with natural aging and not causally related to the prior work injury.

Workers' CompensationConsequential InjuryRight Shoulder PainLeft Shoulder InjuryCausationMedical EvidenceDegenerative ChangesSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
1
Case No. ADJ3304517 (VNO 0558755), ADJ8042777
Regular
Sep 17, 2012

STEPHEN McLAUGHLIN vs. AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP, CHARTIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, reversing a prior award that found the applicant's right shoulder injury to be a separate industrial injury. The Board determined the shoulder injury was a "compensable consequence" of the applicant's original bilateral hand and wrist injury, occurring while receiving treatment. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an additional 104 weeks of temporary disability beyond the statutory limit for the initial injury. The applicant takes nothing by way of his claim for the right shoulder injury as a separate event.

Compensable consequenceCumulative traumaBilateral handsCarpal tunnel syndromeRight shoulder injuryTemporary disabilitySection 4656(c)(1)Petition for reconsiderationFindings and awardWorkers' compensation administrative law judge
References
10
Case No. 534402
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 15, 2022

Matter of Oberg v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc.

Claimant Donald Oberg sustained neck injuries in a work-related motor vehicle accident in August 2020 and sought to amend his claim to include bilateral shoulder injuries. His treating orthopedist, Joseph Giovinazzo, opined that the shoulder injuries were causally related. However, independent medical examiner Vito Loguidice concluded that the shoulder injuries were not causally related, a finding supported by surveillance video of the accident. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially credited Giovinazzo and amended the claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board subsequently rescinded this amendment, crediting Loguidice's opinion. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that substantial evidence supported the Board's determination to disallow the amendment of Oberg's claim for bilateral shoulder injuries.

Workers' Compensation LawCausal RelationshipBilateral Shoulder InjuriesCervical RadiculopathyIndependent Medical ExaminationTreating Physician OpinionConflicting Medical EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Board Discretion
References
5
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00466
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 02, 2023

Matter of Kennedy v. 3rd Track Constructors

Claimant Alastair Kennedy, an operating engineer, sustained work-related injuries in October 2019 after falling into a hole at a job site, filing for workers' compensation benefits for left shoulder, foot, and ankle injuries. The employer's carrier accepted the claim for foot and ankle but contested neck and left shoulder injuries, also raising a Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a violation. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and subsequently the Workers' Compensation Board found claimant's testimony regarding the accident and prior injuries not credible, denying the claims for neck and left shoulder injuries and imposing mandatory and discretionary penalties under Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's findings regarding the non-causal relation of neck and left shoulder injuries and the mandatory penalty for misrepresentations. However, the Court reversed the discretionary penalty of total disqualification from future wage loss benefits, deeming it disproportionate to the offense, modifying and affirming the Board's decision as so modified.

Workers' CompensationInjury ClaimCredibility AssessmentMisrepresentationWorkers' Compensation Law § 114-a ViolationMandatory PenaltyDiscretionary PenaltyWage Loss BenefitsCausal RelationshipMedical Evidence
References
16
Case No. ADJ8361032
Regular
Sep 04, 2019

CAROL WORKMAN vs. ST. THERESA/ST. JOSEPH SCHOOL

This case concerns Carol Workman's claim for benefits from the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) due to bilateral shoulder injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) overturned a prior decision and found Workman entitled to SIBTF benefits. This was based on evidence showing her current work-related shoulder injuries, when combined with prior non-industrial and industrial shoulder issues, met the statutory threshold for SIBTF eligibility. The Board found that the cumulative injury to her shoulders resulted in at least 5% permanent disability before adjustments, satisfying the requirement for SIBTF benefits.

SIBTFSubsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fundwhole person impairmentcumulative traumaacromegalybilateral shouldersrange of motionmotor deficitapportionmentdiminished future earning capacity
References
17
Case No. ADJ2237816 (VNO 0533019) ADJ4364633 (VNO 0515869)
Regular
Jun 02, 2009

YOUBERT MOREH vs. LEXUS OF WESTMINSTER, CYPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves an applicant seeking reconsideration of a denial of additional temporary disability indemnity (TDI) for two industrial injuries: a right shoulder injury in January 2005 and a back injury on March 21, 2005. The original judge denied further TDI, citing a two-year statutory limit under Labor Code section 4656(c)(1). The applicant contends the TDI for the back injury should not count towards the shoulder injury limit, as the shoulder injury was not yet claimed or accepted when TDI for the back was paid. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the prior order, and returned the case for further development of the record. This is to determine the precise periods of temporary disability for each injury and the extent of any overlap, which is crucial for applying the TDI limitations.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardTemporary Disability IndemnityLabor Code section 4656Overlapping InjuriesRight Shoulder InjuryBack InjuryAuto MechanicQualified Medical EvaluatorFindings of FactReconsideration
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Thomasula v. Wilson Concrete & Masonry

Claimant sought workers' compensation benefits for a left shoulder injury sustained during employment. The Workers' Compensation Board denied the claim, finding claimant's testimony not credible due to a delay in seeking medical attention, failure to file an accident report, and admitting to misrepresenting the injury as non-work-related for private insurance. Claimant appealed, but the appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, upholding the Board's authority to resolve credibility issues. The court found substantial evidence supported the determination that the injury was not work-related. Claimant's remaining arguments were considered and rejected as lacking merit.

Workers' CompensationCredibility AssessmentAccidental InjuryEmployment InjuryMedical Attention DelayAccident ReportInsurance MisrepresentationAppellate ReviewSubstantial EvidenceBoard's Authority
References
3
Showing 1-10 of 12,759 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