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

Hawkins v. Center for Spinal Surgery

Demica Hawkins, a Black former Accounts Payable Coordinator, sued her employer, The Center for Spinal Surgery (CSS), alleging race discrimination, retaliation, and FMLA interference. The lawsuit stemmed from denied pay raises, disciplinary actions, and ultimately her termination while on pregnancy leave, which Hawkins claims was discriminatory and retaliatory. CSS filed a renewed motion for summary judgment, and Hawkins filed a partial motion for summary judgment. The court granted in part and denied in part CSS's motion, dismissing Hawkins' pregnancy discrimination and certain retaliation claims. However, Hawkins' retaliatory discharge and FMLA interference claims related to her 2013 termination will proceed to trial due to genuine disputes of material fact regarding CSS's motivations.

Race DiscriminationRetaliationFMLA InterferenceSummary JudgmentEmployment LawTitle VIIPregnancy Discrimination ActMcDonnell Douglas FrameworkHonest Belief RulePretext
References
64
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United Spinal Ass'n v. Board of Elections in the City of New York

Plaintiffs United Spinal Association and Disabled in Action brought an action against the Board of Elections in the City of New York (BOE) under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, alleging pervasive access barriers at poll sites. The Court previously denied a preliminary injunction. Both parties subsequently moved for summary judgment. The Court found no genuine dispute of material fact regarding the existence of pervasive and recurring accessibility barriers and deemed the BOE's accommodation methods insufficient. Consequently, the Court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on liability and denied the defendants' cross-motion. The case is now referred to a Magistrate Judge for the determination of the appropriate remedy.

AccessibilityVoting RightsAmericans with Disabilities ActRehabilitation ActPoll SitesSummary JudgmentDisability DiscriminationBoard of ElectionsMeaningful AccessReasonable Accommodation
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 03, 2019

Amendolia, Roseanne v. Emory Valley Center, Inc.

Ms. Amendolia sustained work-related back and neck injuries in June 2017 while employed by Emory Valley, leading to a workers' compensation claim. Disputes arose regarding the causal link of her L4-L5 spinal stenosis, the degree of permanent medical impairment, and her vocational disability. The court adopted Dr. McMahon's causation opinion, finding her work injury caused a L3-L4 disc herniation and aggravated L4-L5 spinal stenosis. However, it sided with Dr. Koenig on impairment ratings, establishing a combined 11% permanent whole-person impairment. Consequently, Ms. Amendolia's claim for permanent and total disability was denied, but she was awarded medical treatment and an original lump-sum payment of $17,165.61, with further claims reserved.

Workers' CompensationSpinal StenosisHerniated DiscPermanent ImpairmentVocational DisabilityMedical CausationAggravation of Preexisting ConditionTreating Physician OpinionIndependent Medical ExaminationAMA Guides
References
9
Case No. 2017-06-0405
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 06, 2017

Castillo, David Valle v. The Hotel Group Holdings, LLC

David Valle Castillo, an employee of The Hotel Group Holdings, LLC, filed a request for expedited hearing seeking additional medical and temporary benefits for a compensable injury. Mr. Castillo, a dishwasher, slipped and fell on October 7, 2016, and the claim was accepted. He sought treatment from Dr. Edward Mackey, who recommended spinal fusion surgery due to symptomatic spinal stenosis. The employer denied further medical benefits based on an independent medical examination by Dr. Tarek Elalayli, who concluded the work injury was less than 50% related. The Court found that Dr. Mackey's opinion, affirmed by a causation letter, was presumed correct and that the employer failed to rebut this presumption. The Court granted Mr. Castillo's request for medical benefits, ordering The Hotel Group to authorize continued treatment with Dr. Mackey, including the recommended surgery. However, the request for temporary disability benefits was denied due to incomplete records regarding the duration of disability.

Expedited HearingMedical BenefitsTemporary BenefitsSpinal StenosisSpinal FusionCausation OpinionTreating PhysicianIndependent Medical ExaminationPresumption of CorrectnessBurden of Proof
References
3
Case No. ADJ1926394 (POM 0267363)
Regular
Jul 20, 2009

Francisco Costa vs. Ralph's Grocery Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a $100\%$ permanent disability award to Francisco Costa. Defendant Ralph's Grocery Company argued that $20\%$ of the disability should be apportioned to Costa's pre-existing congenital spinal stenosis, citing medical opinions. The Board found that the medical record justified apportionment but lacked sufficient detail on the basis for the physicians' opinions. Consequently, the Board rescinded the award and returned the case to the trial level for further development of the medical record regarding apportionment.

WCABRalph's Grocery CompanyFrancisco Costapermanent disabilityapportionmentcongenital spinal stenosiscauda equina syndromedecompression surgeryQMEsubstantial medical evidence
References
3
Case No. SJO 0227228
Regular
Nov 13, 2007

CURTIS CARUSI vs. MARKETSHARE, INC., ACE/USA

This case concerns the apportionment of permanent disability for an applicant with a cumulative trauma injury to his neck and upper extremities. The Agreed Medical Examiner (AME) determined that 60% of the applicant's permanent disability was due to non-industrial spinal stenosis and 40% was work-related. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration, finding the AME's opinion constituted substantial medical evidence for apportionment. The WCAB rescinded the prior award and returned the case for a new award reflecting the AME's apportionment.

WCABMarketshare Inc.Curtis CarusiACE/USAESISSJO 0227228Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial cumulative traumaNeck injury
References
5
Case No. ADJ1926394
Regular
Dec 08, 2010

FRANCISCO COSTA vs. RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY

In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend the award to include future medical treatment. However, they affirmed the judge's finding of 80% permanent disability, which included a 20% apportionment to the applicant's pre-existing congenital spinal stenosis. The applicant argued against apportionment, but the Board found that medical evidence supported the conclusion that the pre-existing condition aggravated the industrial injury and led to more severe permanent disability. The Board clarified that "lighting up" a dormant condition is no longer a bar to apportionment under current law.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentCongenital Spinal StenosisCauda Equina SyndromeLower Back InjuryUrologic System InjuryGI Tract Injury
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Cameron v. Chalet

This case involves an appeal from a decision by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The Board had ruled that the claimant's injury sustained on April 22, 2000, had resolved, and her ongoing disability was a result of pre-existing extensive degenerative changes, scoliosis, and spinal stenosis throughout her spine. The appellate court found substantial evidence to support the Board's determination. It noted that the resolution of factual discrepancies and conflicting medical opinions falls within the Board's jurisdiction, despite some evidence potentially supporting an opposite conclusion. The decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board was affirmed.

AppealSubstantial EvidencePreexisting ConditionDegenerative ChangesScoliosisSpinal StenosisMedical OpinionsFactual DiscrepanciesCausationDisability Benefits
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co. v. Taylor

The appellate court reversed a trial court's judgment in a workers' compensation case, ruling that the trial court erred by refusing to provide a 'sole cause' instruction to the jury. The appellant argued that the appellee's pre-existing spinal stenosis, not an industrial injury, was the sole cause of disability. The court clarified that while 'sole cause' is an inferential rebuttal issue and not submitted as a special issue, an appropriate instruction must be given if supported by pleadings and evidence. Finding that the issue was raised, the appellate court concluded the omission was an abuse of discretion and harmful error, remanding the case for a new trial.

Sole Cause InstructionInferential Rebuttal IssuesTrial Court DiscretionAbuse of DiscretionPre-existing ConditionSpinal StenosisJury InstructionsRemand for New TrialProducing CauseMedical Testimony
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Northeast Independent School District v. Hayes

This case is an appeal from a worker's compensation judgment where a jury found the appellee, Alfred, totally and permanently disabled. Alfred, an employee of the North East School District, suffered spinal stenosis due to a job-related injury while driving a tractor mower. The appellant challenged the sufficiency of evidence regarding the total and permanent incapacity. Despite continuing to work due to economic necessity, medical testimony supported Alfred's claim of permanent disability. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's findings under the Worker's Compensation Act.

Total Permanent DisabilityFactual Sufficiency of EvidenceSpinal StenosisJob-Related InjuryEconomic NecessityAppellate ReviewMedical TestimonyTrial Court JudgmentAffirmationTexas Law
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 282 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