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

Johnson v. Schevenell Ready Mix, Inc.

Thomas Johnson appealed the dismissal of his worker's compensation claim for permanent disability benefits due to traumatic neurosis from an on-the-job accident in 1978. He sustained a scalping injury and other minor injuries when his "pay-loader" went over a cliff. While employer-selected physicians found no neurological disability, appellant's psychiatrist, Dr. Nancy H. Duckworth, diagnosed permanent disability from traumatic neurosis based on subjective complaints. The trial judge rejected Dr. Duckworth's testimony, citing an incorrect legal principle that medical evidence must have a basis other than subjective complaints. The Supreme Court clarified that T.C.A. § 24-718 allows medical opinions based on subjective findings from qualified experts to establish disability if found credible. The Court vacated the dismissal and remanded the case to the trial court for a new evaluation of witness testimony, including Dr. Duckworth's, and the introduction of further evidence regarding appellant's psychiatric treatment.

Disability BenefitsTraumatic NeurosisMedical EvidenceSubjective FindingsCredibility of WitnessRemandAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationPsychiatric EvaluationOn-the-job Injury
References
4
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. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. Union Carbide Corp.

Russell B. Smith sued Union Carbide Corporation after his medical termination, seeking pension benefits or damages for wrongful discharge. Smith, employed for over 15 years, was terminated in 1961 due to a 'medical termination' after refusing recommended psychiatric treatment for his anxiety and traumatic neurosis. The dispute centered on whether he was permanently and totally disabled under the company's pension plan, and if the arbitration process, involving three physicians, was valid. The court found the arbitrators failed to consult as required by the collective bargaining agreement, making their decision non-binding. Ultimately, the court ruled that Smith was indeed permanently and totally disabled as of his termination date, granting him pension benefits and overruling the defendant's motion to re-refer the case to arbitration.

Pension DisputeWrongful TerminationDisability BenefitsCollective Bargaining AgreementMedical TerminationTraumatic NeurosisAnxiety ReactionFederal Court JurisdictionJudicial Review of ArbitrationContract Interpretation
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Poblet v. Parisi

Plaintiff, Mrs. Poblet, suffered alleged "post-traumatic neurosis syndrome" after a car collision on February 20, 1981, claiming serious injury requiring psychiatric care. Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting the plaintiff failed to establish "serious injury" under New York's No-Fault Law (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]). Judge Alan LeVine evaluated whether a solely psychiatric injury could meet the "serious injury" threshold, including whether it constituted a "significant limitation of use of a body function or system" or a non-permanent injury preventing substantially all daily activities for 90 days. The court, citing legislative intent to limit minor injury lawsuits, held that while medically determined, Mrs. Poblet's condition did not prevent her from performing substantially all daily activities for the statutory period. Consequently, the defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted, dismissing the complaint.

Summary JudgmentNo-Fault LawSerious Injury ThresholdPsychiatric InjuryPost-Traumatic Neurosis SyndromeAutomobile AccidentInsurance LawCPLR 3212 MotionMedical EvidenceMental Health Impact
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Guess v. Finger Lakes Ambulance

The claimant, a paramedic, suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder after responding to a fatal industrial accident where a victim conversed with her before succumbing to horrific injuries. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found the injury accidental, the Workers' Compensation Board later disallowed the claim, asserting that the stress was not greater than what a paramedic typically experiences. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, citing evidence that paramedics are routinely exposed to traumatic events. This ruling emphasizes that for a mental injury from psychic trauma to be compensable, the stress must exceed that of a similarly situated worker's normal work environment.

Post-Traumatic Stress DisorderParamedicAccidental InjuryPsychic TraumaWorkers' Compensation BenefitsStress-Related InjuryNormal Work EnvironmentTraumatic Event ExposureMental Injury CompensabilityAppellate Review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Ornstein v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

This case addresses the viability of claims for emotional and psychological injury, specifically AIDS phobia and post-traumatic stress disorder, following an HIV exposure. The plaintiff, a nurse, was accidentally pricked by a contaminated needle and subsequently developed severe emotional distress. The Supreme Court had allowed her claims for post-traumatic stress disorder to extend beyond the established six-month limitation for AIDS phobia. However, this appellate court reversed that decision, ruling that all related emotional damages must adhere to the six-month period, based on the scientific consensus regarding the likelihood of HIV infection detection.

AIDS PhobiaHIV ExposureEmotional DistressPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderNegligent Infliction of Emotional DistressSix-Month Limitation RuleMedical ConsensusObjective StandardNeedle Stick InjuryWorkers' Compensation Psychiatrist
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 01, 2006

Sanchez v. City of New York

The Supreme Court, New York County, denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a settlement pertaining to an infant plaintiff's emotional injuries. The appellate court unanimously affirmed this denial. Plaintiffs, including the infant's guardian, claimed they only discovered the true extent of the infant's emotional injuries, including post-traumatic stress syndrome, in the summer of 2005 following an examination by a social worker. However, the court found that these psychological injuries were known from the case's inception in 2001 and were appropriately considered when the settlement was agreed upon in December 2004. Evidence, including a 2001 psychiatric evaluation, confirmed the infant's diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder prior to the settlement agreement.

Settlement DisputeInfant's RightsPost-Traumatic Stress DisorderVacating SettlementCompromise OrderPsychological HarmSearch Warrant ExecutionAppellate AffirmationParental GuardianJudicial Discretion
References
2
Case No. No. 12627
Regular Panel Decision
May 06, 1954

American General Ins. Co. v. Bailey

This case concerns an appeal regarding a worker's compensation claim in Texas. Appellee Bailey sought compensation for permanent partial disability following a scaffold incident where he witnessed a co-worker's death and experienced severe fright and an anxiety state, despite sustaining only minor physical bruises. The appellant, American General Ins. Co., challenged the judgment, arguing that Bailey's neurosis, not directly resulting from a physical injury, was not compensable under the Workmen's Compensation Statutes. The Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Galveston, reversed the trial court's decision, ruling that under Texas law, a neurosis or emotional condition is only compensable if it is a direct consequence of a physical injury, a condition not met in this case.

Workers' CompensationEmotional TraumaNeurosisPhysical InjuryAnxiety StateScaffold AccidentTexas LawMental HealthCompensable InjuryFright
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Transportation Insurance Co. v. Maksyn

Joe J. Maksyn, an advertising service manager, filed a claim for workmen's compensation benefits due to an occupational disease—an anxiety depression caused by work pressures, leading to physical symptoms. The Industrial Accident Board granted an award, which Transportation Insurance Company challenged. A jury found that Maksyn suffered an occupational disease from repetitious physical traumatic activities arising from employment, causing permanent total incapacity starting September 4, 1974. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, ruling that mental traumatic activities, especially when combined with physical aspects, can be compensable under the amended Workmen's Compensation Act, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings regarding the onset and nature of the disability.

Occupational diseaseAnxiety depressionRepetitious physical traumatic activitiesMental traumaPhysical traumaWorkmen's Compensation ActTotal incapacityPermanent disabilityHypertensionMedical evaluation
References
11
Case No. W2001-00179-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 13, 2001

Michael Cheslock v. Bd. of Admin., etc .

Michael Cheslock, a Memphis Police Lieutenant, sought a line of duty disability pension for job-related Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after two specific traumatic incidents. The Pension Board denied his request, citing that his condition did not meet the 'accident at some definite time and place' requirement of the Memphis Code of Ordinances. This decision was upheld by the Chancery Court of Shelby County. On appeal, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the lower court's ruling, finding material evidence supported the Pension Board's determination. The appellate court concluded that the incidents, while extreme, could be considered within the expected scope of a Tactical Unit officer's duties, and that the evidence was ambiguous regarding whether the PTSD resulted from a specific accident or a gradual build-up of stress.

PTSDDisability PensionWorkers' CompensationMental InjuryLine of DutyMemphis CodeWrit of CertiorariPolice OfficerJob-related StressAccident Definition
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 202 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