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 Estrada v. Peepels Mechanical Corp.

The claimant's case was established for occupational disease resulting in bilateral hearing loss. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) determined the date of disablement and, after initial discharge, reinstated the State Insurance Fund (Fund) to produce an apportionment report between occupational disease and traumatic hearing loss. The Fund appealed this decision. The Workers’ Compensation Board subsequently found the Fund was not the proper party as it did not cover the employer on the date of disablement and reversed the order for the apportionment report. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier then appealed the Board's decision. The higher court affirmed the Board’s decision, noting that a claim for traumatic hearing loss was never formally made or pending before the Board.

Occupational DiseaseBilateral Hearing LossApportionmentDate of DisablementWorkers' Compensation CarrierState Insurance FundBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewTraumatic Hearing LossWCLJ Decision
References
1
Case No. 2022-02-0210
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 17, 2023

Bassham, Stephen v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc.

Stephen Bassham, an employee of Lowe's, sought a second medical opinion for wrist injuries sustained while building and dismantling shelving. He noticed pain while golfing, leading to diagnoses of bilateral ligament tears and later bilateral wrist arthritis with traumatic ligament ruptures by various physicians. Lowe's denied his request for a second opinion, arguing his authorized doctor did not recommend surgery or a referral for one. The Court, citing Tennessee Code Annotated sections, denied Mr. Bassham's request. It found that no physician had recommended surgery, which is a prerequisite for a second opinion on that issue under Tennessee law.

Workers CompensationMedical Treatment DisputeSecond Opinion RequestWrist InjuryBilateral Ligament TearsWrist ArthritisTraumatic Ligament RupturesMaximum Medical ImprovementPre-existing ConditionExpedited Hearing
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n v. Wilson

Allon D. Wilson, an injured worker, obtained a jury verdict for total and permanent incapacity benefits against Texas Employers’ Insurance Association, stemming from an August 12, 1972 injury. The insurance carrier appealed, arguing that Wilson's continued employment and wage increases negated total incapacity. However, the court found substantial medical evidence of progressive disabilities, including nerve root irritation and traumatic arthritis, and noted Wilson's work was driven by economic necessity. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment, reiterating that earning money does not preclude total and permanent disability under workmen's compensation law, and found no merit in the carrier's points of error.

Workmen's CompensationTotal IncapacityPermanent IncapacityJury VerdictEarning CapacityMedical EvidenceNerve Root IrritationTraumatic ArthritisDisability BenefitsEconomic Necessity
References
8
Case No. 2018-01-0313
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 21, 2019

Lane, Michael L. v. Viskase Companies, Inc.

Michael L. Lane, an employee, sought medical and temporary disability benefits for a ruptured left wrist tendon sustained at work while pulling a stuck latch. The case involved conflicting medical opinions from Dr. Sanabria, who attributed the injury to pre-existing arthritis, and orthopedic surgeon Dr. Ivey, who considered it a work-compensable traumatic rupture. The Court, despite a presumption for Dr. Sanabria's opinion, found Dr. Ivey's explanation more plausible due to his specialization and surgical findings. Consequently, the Court granted Mr. Lane's claim for medical benefits, ordering the employer, Viskase Companies, Inc., to cover Dr. Ivey's treatment and authorize him as the treating physician. However, the claim for temporary disability benefits was denied as no physician had taken the employee off work.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityCausation DisputePre-existing ConditionWrist Tendon RuptureOrthopedic SurgeryConflicting Medical OpinionsExpedited HearingRebuttable Presumption
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 20, 1996

Roman v. 1185 Avenue of the Americas Associates

This case involves an appeal from an order granting the plaintiff, Victor Roman, leave to amend his bill of particulars to include additional injuries. Roman filed an action in 1989 for injuries sustained in a 1987 job site accident, initially alleging traumatic degenerative arthritis and torn muscles in his left hip. After undergoing hip replacement surgeries in 1992 and 1994, a stipulation was made in 1994 with defendant A.J. Contracting Co., allowing for further discovery if the hip surgeries were later alleged to be causally related. In 1996, Roman moved to amend his bill of particulars to include these surgeries, supported by proof of workers' compensation coverage due to the causal connection. The court granted this motion, and the appellate court affirmed, citing the policy of freely allowing amendments in the absence of prejudice, which the defendants failed to demonstrate.

Personal injurySlip and fallConstruction accidentHip replacementBill of particularsLeave to amendStipulationCausal connectionWorkers' compensationPrejudice
References
1
Case No. 2025-80-1847
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 28, 2026

LEE, ERICA V. AMAZON

The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims at Memphis held an expedited hearing for Erica Lee's request for additional medical and temporary disability benefits for a shoulder injury from July 11, 2023, while working at Amazon. Amazon denied the request, asserting her current symptoms were not caused by the work injury. Orthopedist Dr. Riley Jones diagnosed a partial rotator cuff tear and arthritis, determining the tear was more degenerative than traumatic and that her 4% impairment rating was not causally related to the Amazon injury. While Dr. David Buechner offered a conflicting opinion, the Court upheld Dr. Jones's presumed correct opinion as the authorized treating physician. The Court concluded that Ms. Lee failed to establish a causal connection for her current need for treatment and did not prove her period of disability, thus denying her requested benefits.

Shoulder injuryRotator cuff tearDegenerative conditionCausationMedical benefitsTemporary disability benefitsMaximum medical improvement (MMI)Impairment ratingAuthorized treating physicianExpedited hearing
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Shadle v. Amerisure Companies

George Shadle, employed by Amerisure Insurance Companies as a claims adjuster, sustained a right elbow injury in May 1986 after a fall. Dr. E.B. Wilkinson, Jr., an orthopedic surgeon, diagnosed a fractured radius and ulna, noting non-union of a radial head chip, significant limitation of motion, and traumatic arthritis, assessing an 11% permanent partial impairment of the elbow. A neurologist, Dr. David L. Cunningham, found Shadle's hand numbness unrelated to the injury. The trial court initially fixed vocational disability at 11% to the right arm and denied future medical expenses. The appellate court affirmed the 11% permanent partial disability but modified the judgment to direct Amerisure Insurance Companies to provide reasonably required future medical services, remanding the case for further proceedings.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityFuture Medical ExpensesElbow FractureRight Arm InjuryTraumatic ArthritisVocational DisabilityMedical ExaminerAppellate ReviewTennessee Law
References
3
Case No. 2016-02-0033
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2017

Burleson, Gary v. Doyle's Tire Service, Inc.

Gary Burleson sought workers' compensation benefits for knee injuries and septic arthritis allegedly sustained during work. The central legal issues concerned whether his knee injuries and septic arthritis were compensable work-related incidents. The court, crediting the testimony of medical experts Drs. Whitman, Horton, and Smith over Dr. DeTroye, found that Mr. Burleson failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence a causal connection between his work activities and his claimed injuries or the subsequent septic arthritis. Consequently, the court denied his claim for all requested workers' compensation benefits.

Workers' Compensation ClaimKnee InjurySeptic ArthritisCausation DisputeMedical Expert TestimonyPreponderance of EvidenceACL TearPermanent ImpairmentMaximum Medical ImprovementSocial Security Offset
References
3
Case No. 2023-07-2338
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 29, 2024

Holloway, Christopher v. Natchez Trace Youth Academy

Christopher Holloway, a 47-year-old employee, sustained a left-knee injury at work while breaking up a fight. He sought increased benefits, contending his permanent disability rating should include left-knee arthritis in addition to a meniscal tear. The Court, however, upheld a one percent impairment rating based solely on the meniscal tear, concluding that while the work injury aggravated his preexisting arthritis symptoms, it did not primarily cause the arthritis or his current disablement. Despite this, the Court found Holloway reasonably resigned from his pre-injury job due to his knee condition, thus entitling him to increased benefits. The employer was ordered to pay $6,449.24 in permanent partial disability and increased benefits, plus medical treatment and court costs.

Knee InjuryMeniscal Tear RepairPreexisting ArthritisAggravation of InjuryPermanent Partial DisabilityImpairment Rating DisputeIncreased Benefits AwardReturn-to-Work SuitabilityVoluntary Resignation JustificationMedical Expert Opinions
References
5
Case No. 2022-07-0577
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 14, 2023

Johnson, Carlos M. v. Corecivic, Inc.

Carlos M. Johnson, an employee, sought permanent impairment benefits for a left meniscus tear sustained at work, arguing that his pre-existing arthritis was aggravated by the injury and subsequent surgery, warranting a higher impairment rating. The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims at Jackson adopted Dr. Ferguson's one-percent impairment rating for the meniscus tear, rejecting Mr. Johnson's argument regarding the arthritis. The court found that Mr. Johnson failed to provide sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption that the authorized treating physician's (Dr. Ferguson) opinion was correct, which stated that the arthritis preexisted the injury and was not caused or aggravated by the work-related incident or surgery. Dr. Chung's opposing expert opinion was undermined by his mistaken belief about Mr. Johnson's age.

Permanent ImpairmentMeniscus TearArthritis AggravationMedical Expert OpinionCausationPresumption of CorrectnessChondroplastyIndependent Medical Evaluation (IME)Preexisting ConditionWeight as contributing factor
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 285 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