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. 2021 NY Slip Op 01469
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 11, 2021

Matter of Mayewski v. Superior Plus Energy Servs.

Claimant David Mayewski suffered work-related second and third-degree burns in 2013, leading to scarring and skin grafts. Following a permanency evaluation, his treating physician and an independent medical examiner offered reports concerning a schedule loss of use for his right arm and leg, and the treating physician also found a nonschedule permanent impairment for his torso/skin. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Workers' Compensation Board both concluded that the injuries were amenable to a nonschedule classification. Mayewski appealed this decision, arguing it was limited to his torso and did not account for limited range of motion in his extremities. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence from the treating physician's report detailing objective skin disorder findings, thermal regulation issues, skin irritation, and intermittent pain.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UseNonschedule ClassificationPermanent Partial DisabilityBurnsSkin ImpairmentAppellate ReviewMedical EvidenceImpairment Guidelines
References
5
Case No. ADJ9771839
Regular
Jan 27, 2020

MICHAEL KARLIS vs. CITY OF GLENDALE

This case involves a firefighter's workers' compensation claim for injuries including to his spine, skin, and cardiovascular system. The defendant appealed the initial award, arguing for a cardiac MRI, disputing the cause of GERD, and questioning the disability rating for the skin condition. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to address these issues. Ultimately, the Board affirmed the award, reducing the permanent disability rating slightly to 87% due to a re-evaluation of the skin condition impairment rating.

GERDNSAIDLVHechocardiogramcardiac MRIactinic keratosisprecancerous lesionsdisfigurementAMA Guidespermanent disability rating
References
0
Case No. ADJ8249857
Regular
Jan 19, 2016

LARRY ADAIR vs. CITY OF SAN DIEGO

The applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award for skin cancer, arguing the permanent disability rating was insufficient and jurisdiction should be reserved due to the progressive nature of the disease. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the original award but amending it to include a finding that the applicant is entitled to the presumption of compensability for skin cancer under Labor Code section 3212.1. The Board found no substantial evidence that the applicant's skin cancer was an insidious progressive disease warranting jurisdiction reservation, as it had been excised and declared permanent and stationary.

ADJ8249857Petition for ReconsiderationAmended Findings and Awardarising out of and in the course of employmentAOE/COEpermanent disabilityreservation of jurisdictionsubstantial medical evidenceprimary treating physicianpanel qualified medical evaluator
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Needle Trades Workers' Industrial Union

The indictment charges the defendants, including the Needle Trades Workers’ Industrial Union, with violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act by conspiring to restrain interstate trade in raw skins. The conspiracy involved preventing non-union dressers from processing skins and dealers from shipping to them, employing violent tactics such as threats, assaults, destruction of property, and the use of explosives. The court addressed whether these actions constituted a restraint of interstate commerce, differentiating between local strikes with indirect effects and direct interference with interstate trade. It concluded that the alleged prevention of New York dealers from shipping skins to New Jersey dressers constituted a direct, substantial, and intentional interference with interstate commerce. The court also affirmed that shipping goods for processing across state lines is considered interstate commerce and clarified that the National Industrial Recovery Act did not repeal the Sherman Anti-Trust Act or legalize such a conspiracy. Consequently, the demurrer challenging the sufficiency of the indictment was overruled.

Sherman Anti-Trust ActInterstate CommerceLabor UnionConspiracyDemurrerIndictmentTrade RestraintViolenceSecondary BoycottLabor Disputes
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2001

Claim of Caiazza v. Eastman Kodak Co.

The claimant, a former machinist, developed skin cancer in 1990 and later lung and brain cancers in 2000, attributed to occupational exposure. Following his retirement in 2001, the employer conceded the lung and brain cancers were consequential to the initial skin cancer. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) found the claimant permanently totally disabled and awarded weekly benefits of $300, based on the original skin cancer disablement date of February 27, 1986. The claimant sought Workers' Compensation Board review, arguing for an April 24, 2000 disablement date (diagnosis of lung/brain cancers) to receive higher benefits of $400/week. The Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision, citing the claimant's prior stipulation to modify the original claim for consequential injuries and established law that such awards are measured by rates at the time of the original injury. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding it was not unreasonable to rely on the claimant's agreement and that the award rate was supported by substantial evidence.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation BenefitsDate of DisablementBenefit Rate CalculationConsequential InjurySkin CancerLung CancerBrain CancerPermanent Total DisabilityAppellate Review
References
4
Case No. ADJ7441132
Regular
Jul 20, 2012

Patrick O'Brien vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the original award. The Board found that the applicant's skin cancer was not an insidious progressive disease, reversing the prior reservation of jurisdiction over permanent disability. This decision aligns with previous rulings that such reservation is only appropriate for diseases with a demonstrable likelihood of future progression or recurrence. Consequently, the finding of injury was amended to specify the exact locations and types of skin damage.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPatrick O'BrienCounty of San DiegoSheriff Sergeantindustrial injuryskin damagesolar skin damagecancerinsidious progressive diseasepermanent disability
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Kushner v. Landau, Newman & Rosen

Claimant, a fur nailer, sustained a myocardial infarction while stretching an exceptionally small fur skin, which required increased and unusual effort. The employer corroborated that certain small skins demand significant exertion from the worker. The Workmen's Compensation Board determined that the excessive strain was related to the heart attack and resultant disability, a finding supported by substantial medical evidence. An appeal by the employer and its insurance carrier, who argued against the finding of an accident due due to the absence of unusual effort, was unanimously affirmed.

Myocardial InfarctionFur NailingExcessive StrainWork-Related InjuryUnusual EffortDisabilityWorkmen's CompensationAppealHeart AttackMedical Evidence
References
0
Case No. ADJ7721471
Regular
Jun 18, 2012

DANIEL MURPHY vs. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to clarify that the applicant's basal cell carcinoma is not an insidious progressive disease, therefore jurisdiction cannot be reserved for future permanent disability beyond the statutory five-year limit. The Board amended the findings to state that the injury was to the applicant's nose, not all sun-exposed skin, and future basal cell carcinomas would be considered new injuries. This decision clarifies that the applicant's current award covers the injury to his nose, and any future skin cancers will require separate claims.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Highway PatrolState Compensation Insurance FundDaniel MurphyHighway Patrol Officerbasal cell carcinomainsidious progressive diseasereservation of jurisdictionLabor Code section 5804General Foundry Service v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Jackson)
References
8
Case No. ADJ6836868
Regular
Feb 03, 2012

STEPHEN SEAVELLO vs. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

This case concerns a deputy sheriff diagnosed with skin cancer, with a presumption that it arose from his employment. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed the administrative law judge's finding that the skin cancer was an "insidious disease process" and the subsequent reservation of jurisdiction over permanent disability. The Board determined that the applicant's condition was found to be permanent and stationary, and not a progressive insidious disease, thus precluding jurisdiction beyond the statutory five-year limit for amendments. Consequently, the original award of 4% permanent disability and need for future medical treatment was reinstated, but without the reservation of jurisdiction.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardStephen SeavelloCounty of San DiegoSkin CancerDeputy SheriffPermanent DisabilityFuture Medical TreatmentInsidious Disease ProcessReservation of JurisdictionLabor Code Section 5804
References
8
Case No. ADJ8193963
Regular
Mar 28, 2018

JERRY HUNTER vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

This case involves a petition for reconsideration by the defendant, the State Compensation Insurance Fund, concerning a workers' compensation award for Jerry Hunter. The defendant contested the finding that skin cancer was part of the original stipulated injury and challenged the permanent disability rating based on the treating physician's opinion. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition, adopting the Administrative Law Judge's report. The Board affirmed that the skin cancer was correctly considered part of the original cumulative injury and that the treating physician's opinion constituted substantial evidence for the permanent disability rating.

Petition for ReconsiderationSkin CancerCumulative InjuryLabor Code Section 5803Petition to ReopenNew and Further DisabilityGood CauseStipulations with Request for AwardTreating PhysicianPermanent Disability
References
8
Showing 1-10 of 47 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