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 Schwartz v. State Insurance Fund

Claimant appealed two Workers' Compensation Board decisions. The first decision, filed April 25, 2012, ruled that her alleged cardiac conditions were not causally related to her established work-related stress claim. The second decision, filed May 2, 2012, denied her payment for intermittent lost time. The court affirmed both decisions, finding that the employer's independent medical examiner complied with Workers' Compensation Law § 137, and the Board's resolution of conflicting medical opinions regarding cardiac conditions was supported by substantial evidence. Additionally, the Board's determination that the claimant's Friday absences were for convenience, not disability, was also upheld by substantial evidence.

Workers' Compensation Board AppealsCausally Related DisabilityCardiac ConditionsHypertensionMitral Valve InsufficiencyTricuspid Valve InsufficiencyEnlarged Left AtriumWork-Related StressAdjustment DisorderIntermittent Lost Time Benefits
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coyle v. Intermagnetics Corp.

The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that an unnamed claimant, who suffered work-related back injuries in 1985 and 1989, was entitled to reduced earnings benefits after taking a lower-paying job. The employer, Intermagnetics Corporation, and its workers’ compensation insurance carrier appealed, arguing the reduction in earnings was due to personal reasons, not disability. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence that the claimant's permanent partial disability was a contributing factor to the wage reduction, despite conflicting evidence. The ruling highlighted that physical limitations from a permanent partial disability allow for an inference of causation for subsequent wage loss.

Permanent Partial DisabilityReduced EarningsBack InjuryChiropractic TreatmentCausal RelationshipSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewWage LossEmployment ChangeMedical Testimony
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Castler v. National Grid

Claimant sustained a low back injury in 2006, receiving workers' compensation benefits. In 2013, chiropractor Douglas Van Vorst treated him for two exacerbations after incidents involving shoveling snow and lifting a kayak. The employer's carrier disputed the medical bills, arguing the treatments did not comply with Workers’ Compensation Board Medical Treatment Guidelines (MTG). A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially ruled in favor of the medical provider, but the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, finding insufficient documentation for the exacerbation. On appeal, the court examined the documentation and found that Van Vorst adequately detailed how the exacerbations occurred, objective changes from baseline, expected treatments, and claimant's response, satisfying the MTG requirements. The court concluded that the Board’s finding lacked substantial evidence and therefore reversed the Board's decision, remitting the matter for further proceedings.

Medical Treatment GuidelinesExacerbation of InjuryLow Back InjuryChiropractic TreatmentObjective Functional ImprovementVariance Request12 NYCRR 324.212 NYCRR 324.3Substantial EvidenceRemittal
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 22, 2002

Claim of Ostuni v. Town of Ramapo

Claimant appealed from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed July 22, 2002, which denied her application for reconsideration and/or full Board review of a prior decision. The prior decision had ruled that claimant did not sustain a work-related injury, citing insufficient credible evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's denial, finding that the Board fully considered all evidence and no new, previously unavailable evidence was offered to warrant altering its decision. Furthermore, the court found substantial evidence supported the Board’s September 2001 decision that claimant’s injuries were not compensable, as her recurring lower back pain stemmed from injuries predating or following the alleged November 1990 incident, rather than the incident itself. The court also upheld the Board's rejection of contrary testimony as not credible.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryWork-Related InjuryReconsiderationBoard ReviewAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionArbitrary and CapriciousSubstantial EvidenceMedical Testimony
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of McCaffrey v. James L. Lewis, Inc.

A pipe-fitter, diagnosed with asbestosis and pleural placquing, ceased work in 1988. Initially found disabled by a WCLJ, the Workers’ Compensation Board later reversed this, ruling his pleural placquing was not disabling. The claimant appealed, asserting the Board's decision lacked substantial evidence, that he was legally disabled under Workers’ Compensation Law § 37 (1), and that the decision undermined the law's humanitarian intent. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's ruling, citing substantial medical evidence indicating the claimant's condition was not disabling and that he could still perform pipe-fitting work under appropriate conditions.

asbestosispleural placquingoccupational diseasedisability claimmedical expert testimonysubstantial evidence reviewappellate reviewpulmonary conditionspipe-fitting professioncausation of disability
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 01, 2001

In re the Claim of Barager-Dieter v. Kelly Temporary Services

In this appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, the court affirmed a ruling that the claimant had sustained a permanent partial disability of moderate severity. The claimant reported arm injuries in 1992 due to production work. The Board's determination, which was based on the testimony and report of orthopedic surgeon Matthew Landfried, found sufficient evidence despite conflicting medical opinions. Landfried diagnosed accumulative trauma syndrome, performed multiple surgeries, and placed the claimant under permanent lifting and repetitive activity restrictions. The court upheld the Board's resolution of conflicting medical proof in the claimant's favor, concluding that substantial evidence supported the award.

permanent partial disabilityaccumulative trauma syndromecarpal tunnel surgeryulnar nerve transpositionmedical evidence conflictworkers' compensation appealappellate affirmancelifting restrictionsrepetitive strain injuryorthopedic diagnosis
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Gallo v. Village of Bronxville Police Department

Claimant, a police sergeant, filed for workers' compensation benefits after suffering a myocardial infarction on December 18, 2008. He experienced symptoms after exercising and ascending stairs at work, leading to a diagnosis of myocardial infarction. The Workers’ Compensation Board ruled that the infarction was caused by the stair climbing and arose out of his employment. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's ruling, citing substantial medical evidence from two cardiologists who opined that the work-related stair climbing precipitated the myocardial infarction, even with a preexisting coronary artery disease.

myocardial infarctionwork-related injuryworkers' compensationaccidental injurymedical causationpreexisting conditionstair climbingpolice sergeantappealBoard decision
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Mearns v. Sunoco, Inc.

Claimant, an assistant manager at a convenience store, suffered severe psychological injuries including panic attacks and nightmares after being falsely accused and physically accosted by a police officer following a store break-in. She subsequently ceased working and filed for workers' compensation benefits. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially ruled, and the Workers’ Compensation Board later upheld, that she had sustained a permanent total disability. Despite some conflicting medical opinions regarding the severity of her disability, the Board was found to have properly resolved the evidence in favor of the claimant. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, concluding it was supported by substantial evidence and that there was no basis to disturb the finding of permanent total disability.

permanent total disabilitypsychological traumaworkers' compensation appealmedical expert testimonyconflicting medical evidencepolice misconductworkplace incidentmental healthadministrative lawjudicial review
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Coscia v. Ass'n for the Advancement of Blind & Retarded, Inc.

Claimant, a staff psychologist, was injured at work and filed for workers' compensation benefits. He subsequently filed a discrimination complaint against his employer, Association for the Advancement of Blind and Retarded, Inc., alleging retaliation for his workers' compensation claim, including demotion and exclusion from conferences. His employment was later terminated for alleged improper personal conduct. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge and the Board both ruled against the claimant, finding no evidence of discrimination under Workers' Compensation Law § 120 and concluding that the termination was due to misconduct. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, stating that the claimant failed to demonstrate a retaliatory motive and that the Board's finding of termination solely for misconduct was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' CompensationRetaliatory DischargeDiscriminationMisconductAppellate ReviewBurden of ProofSubstantial EvidenceEmployer-Employee DisputeWorkers' Compensation LawJudicial Review
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Estate of Moody v. Quality Structures, Inc.

Decedent, a laborer, collapsed and died on his first day of work at a construction site while pouring and raking concrete. His estate applied for workers' compensation death benefits for his children. The Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the claim, invoking the presumption of compensability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 21 (1), as the employer failed to rebut it with substantial evidence. An independent medical report by cardiologist Stephen Nash attributed death to cardiac arrhythmia and enlarged heart, with lack of sleep as a contributory factor, but did not rule out work involvement. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding the cause of the fatal arrhythmia unexplained and the employer's evidence insufficient to overcome the presumption.

Workers' Compensation Death BenefitsCausally Related EmploymentPresumption of CompensabilityCardiac ArrhythmiaEnlarged HeartIndependent Medical ReportConstruction Laborer DeathUnexplained CollapseRebuttal of PresumptionSubstantial Evidence
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 16,853 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