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

Ficken v. Vocational Education & Extension Board of Suffolk

The petitioner sought review of her employment termination as a secretary by the Vocational Education and Extension Board of the County of Suffolk (VEEB) and requested reinstatement with back pay. She argued that she was discharged without the procedural protections afforded to civil servants under Civil Service Law § 75. VEEB contended that the petitioner was not covered by these protections. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing her reinstatement and back pay. The appellate court affirmed this decision, holding that the petitioner's position, though designated 'unclassified' by Suffolk County, did not fit any category under Civil Service Law § 35, thus classifying it as 'classified' and entitling her to § 75 protections. The court emphasized that the petitioner could not be denied these rights until a proper classification was established.

Civil Service LawEmployment TerminationReinstatementBack PayUnclassified ServiceClassified ServiceCivil Servant RightsDue ProcessArticle 78 ProceedingSuffolk County
References
5
Case No. RDG 0095368; RDG 0095369; RDG 0095573; RDG 0126270
Regular
Sep 25, 2007

HENRY PHILLIPE vs. GOTTSCHALKS, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to allow reimbursement for the applicant's vocational expert fees, reversing the WCJ's decision. The Board found it reasonable for the applicant to hire his own vocational expert to rebut the defendant's expert, especially given the passage of time since the original vocational feasibility report. Consequently, the defendant was ordered to reimburse the applicant's attorney for the $1,075.00 vocational expert cost.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationExpert Witness FeesVocational ExpertLabor Code Section 5811Qualified Rehabilitation Representative (QRR)LeBoeuf argumentAgreed Medical Examination (AME)Permanent DisabilityIndustrial Injury
References
3
Case No. ADJ6828125
Regular
2016-09-00

JACOB DAVIS vs. O'BRIEN MARKET, INC., WAUSAU INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted applicant Jacob Davis's petition for reconsideration. The Board rescinded the prior award of 39% permanent disability, finding that the trial judge erred in rejecting vocational expert testimony without proper grounds. The case is remanded to the trial level for further proceedings to adequately develop the record regarding the applicant's psychiatric work restrictions and vocational feasibility, particularly concerning the impact of industrial injury versus non-industrial factors.

Petition for ReconsiderationVocational ExpertScheduled RatingPermanent DisabilityPsychiatric Work RestrictionsVocational FeasibilityCumulative InjuryRebuttal EvidenceMedical EvaluatorsApportionment
References
5
Case No. STK 0173461
Regular
Aug 14, 2008

CAMERON LEGGETT vs. PPG AUTO GLASS COMPANY, SENTRY INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, upholding the finding that the applicant sustained an industrial spinal injury on August 22, 2001. While the applicant argued for retroactive Vocational Rehabilitation Maintenance Allowance (VRMA) from earlier demands, the Board found no industrial injury was admitted until May 19, 2008. Crucially, no medical evidence supported vocational rehabilitation feasibility until a May 2006 report, distinguishing this case from precedent cited by the applicant. Therefore, VRMA was correctly awarded only from the date of medical eligibility.

VOCATIONAL REHABILITATIONVRMADELAY RATERETROACTIVE BENEFITSMEDICAL FEASIBILITYQUALIFIED REHABILITATION REPRESENTATIVEQRRDENIED INJURYACCEPTED INJURYQIW
References
3
Case No. ADJ10908468
Regular
Jun 30, 2025

DANIEL DORIS vs. DBI BEVERAGES, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES

Defendant filed a Petition for Reconsideration of a Findings and Award, challenging the deferral of issues regarding catastrophic injury and vocational expert fees. The Appeals Board, treating the petition under a removal standard despite a final order, agreed with the WCJ that the record was incomplete concerning applicant's work restrictions and vocational feasibility, thus requiring further development. Concluding that the defendant failed to establish substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration would be an adequate remedy if an adverse final decision ultimately issues, the Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardCervical spineLumbar spinePsychUpper extremitiesLower extremitiesBowelBladderApportionment
References
11
Case No. ADJ6413644
Regular
Apr 24, 2009

JANICE HOWELL vs. NATIONAL MENTOR HOLDINGS, dba COLE VOCATIONAL SERVICES, administered by ESIS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the applicant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order determining substantive rights or liabilities. The petition also sought removal, which was denied as the applicant failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. The underlying issues, such as an order compelling medical record production, are interlocutory procedural matters not subject to reconsideration. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and recommendation, denying both reconsideration and removal.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderSubstantive RightRemovalWCJ Report and RecommendationStipulationsOrder Compelling Production of RecordsDiscovery ProcessPrivacy
References
11
Case No. ADJ11184599, ADJ11184523
Regular
Feb 24, 2020

Gregory White vs. Sky 2 Collision Corporation, Illinois Midwest Insurance Company, Inc., National Casualty Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Gregory White's petition for reconsideration of a $47\%$ permanent disability award. White argued he was permanently totally disabled due to vocational limitations, but the Board found substantial evidence supported his ability to benefit from vocational rehabilitation. The Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's finding that White was not permanently totally disabled and that his vocational expert's report was less persuasive than the defense vocational expert's. Issues regarding vocational costs were deferred pending a separate petition.

Cumulative traumaSpecific injuryLow back injuryLumbar spineBacterial infectionStreptoccocusLaminectomyPermanent disabilityVocational rehabilitationQualified injured worker
References
4
Case No. FRE 0185879, FRE 0094306
Regular
Dec 20, 2007

RHONDA KAREN GAITHER vs. BECKMAN COULTER, INC., INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration to amend an award for Rhonda Karen Gaither. While affirming the 91% permanent disability, the Board added a life pension, increasing the attorney's fees to 15% of the total award, including the commuted value of the pension. The Board adopted the Workers' Compensation Judge's reasoning regarding vocational rehabilitation feasibility and the credibility of expert testimony.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardRhonda Karen GaitherBeckman CoulterInc.Insurance Company of PennsylvaniaAIG Claims ServicesInc.Findings and AwardPermanent DisabilityVocational Rehabilitation
References
1
Case No. OAK 0317695
Regular
Aug 23, 2007

PERTTI KAKSONEN vs. U.C. BERKELEY, SEDGEWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant feasible for employment, despite his latex allergy. The Board found no evidence that the applicant was unable to work in environments containing latex, citing his ability to drive long distances and complete vocational rehabilitation classes. The decision also noted that the applicant had not presented evidence to justify using the 1997 permanent disability rating schedule and that newly discovered evidence was not properly submitted.

Permanent Disability Rating ScheduleVocational RehabilitationLatex AllergyFeasible for EmploymentReconsideration DeniedLabor Code Section 5903Newly Discovered EvidenceWCJ OpinionQRR TestimonyDr. Tannenbaum Report
References
0
Case No. ADJ2616452
Regular
Feb 19, 2009

Alicia Montgomery vs. Tip Top Meats European Deli, Commercial Casualty Insurance Company

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award. The Board found the medical record insufficient to support the finding of permanent total disability, specifically lacking evidence on how applicant's medications affected her cognitive function. The case was returned to the trial level for further development of the medical record to address this deficiency. The Board also noted that pre-existing non-industrial factors cannot be solely relied upon for vocational rehabilitation non-feasibility.

Permanent Total DisabilityVocational RehabilitationMedical Record DevelopmentMedication EffectsCognitive FunctioningIntellectual AbilitiesPain BehaviorsFunctional Capacity EvaluationApportionmentLeBoeuf
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 601 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