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
Jul 09, 1982

Claim of Bartolotta v. Metz

Claimant, a 59-year-old inside painter with a pre-existing arteriosclerotic heart disease, suffered a myocardial infarction on January 5, 1979, while painting at work. He had experienced a similar episode in December 1978 but did not seek medical attention. The Workers' Compensation Board found the myocardial infarction compensable, stating the painting work involved more exertion than the ordinary wear and tear of life given his pre-existing condition. The employer and carrier appealed, arguing the work was not strenuous. The court affirmed the Board's decision, citing substantial medical evidence that the exertion of painting precipitated the cardiac event.

myocardial infarctionarteriosclerotic heart diseasecompensable injurystrenuous workpre-existing conditionmedical testimony conflictsubstantial evidenceWorkers' Compensation Lawcausationappellate review
References
2
Case No. 67209218
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Kane v. Hart & Krouse Corp.

The case involves an appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Board regarding the timeliness of a claim for a myocardial infarction. The claimant, a sandblaster, suffered a myocardial infarction in April 1967. An initial C-3 form filed in September 1968 listed 'silicosis,' but subsequent medical reports by Dr. Edward C. Alessi detailed a heart condition. A later C-3 form in September 1972 specifically mentioned the myocardial infarction. The employer argued the cardiac claim, filed in 1972, was untimely under Workers’ Compensation Law section 28. The Board found that the September 1968 filing, combined with the medical reports, sufficiently alerted the carrier to the claimant's condition. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence to support the timeliness of the claim.

Timeliness of ClaimMyocardial InfarctionSilicosisWorkers' Compensation LawNotice to CarrierMedical ReportsPermanent DisabilityHeart ConditionOccupational DiseaseC-3 Form
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Cramer v. Barney's Clothing Store

A claimant appealed an award for disability due to a myocardial infarction. The board found that an argument with his supervisor about pay led to severe chest pain, and medical evidence supported that excitement from the argument, superimposed on a prior cardiac condition, caused the infarction. The claimant testified to a 20-minute argument with his assistant manager about overtime pay, during which he threatened to go home and experienced chest pains. The court, however, found no legally sufficient basis for the board's finding of an accident, stating the situation did not involve emotional tension greater than typical workplace irritations and was not exceptional enough to meet established legal tests for accident. Consequently, the decision and award were reversed, and the matter was remitted to the Workmen's Compensation Board.

myocardial infarctionworkplace argumentemotional stressworkers' compensationcardiac pathologydisability awardlegal precedentmedical evidenceappealboard finding
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Millar v. Town of Newburgh

An employer and its insurance carrier appealed a Workmen’s Compensation Board decision that awarded death benefits to a claimant, alleging the decedent suffered a compensable acute myocardial infarction due to emotional strain. The board found the decedent's stress, caused by the employer dividing his supervisory duties and hiring a new, higher-paid employee, led to his cardiac event and subsequent death. The appellate court acknowledged medical proof of causal relationship and precedents linking business pressures to compensable cardiac events. However, it reversed the decision, ruling that emotional upset stemming from an employer's legitimate business decisions, even if medically linked to a cardiac event, does not constitute a compensable industrial accident, dismissing the claim.

Workmen's CompensationMyocardial InfarctionEmotional StrainCausal RelationshipCompensable AccidentEmployment DecisionsAppellate ReviewDeath BenefitsEmployer LiabilityIndustrial Accident Scope
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Gracie v. C. E. Halback Co.

This case concerns an appeal from an award of death benefits by the Workmen’s Compensation Board, which found a causal relationship between Robert Graeie's death on March 30, 1961, and a compensable myocardial infarction he sustained on April 10, 1950. The decedent, an iron worker, underwent vascular surgery after the initial infarction, leading to a post-operative myocardial infarction that was the immediate cause of his death. Appellants contested the causal relation. However, medical testimony supported the Board’s determination, indicating that the 1950 myocardial infarction initiated a chain of events that culminated in his death. Physicians testified that without the initial infarction, Graeie would have been better equipped to withstand the subsequent fatal event, affirming a progressive downhill course since his first cardiac incident. The Board's decision, finding causal relation, was affirmed.

Myocardial InfarctionCausal RelationDeath BenefitsWorkers' CompensationVascular SurgeryEmbolusPost-operative ComplicationsMedical TestimonyAppellate ReviewBoard Decision
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Wilcox v. Village of Endicott

Claimant, a lieutenant with the Village of Endicott Police Department, filed for benefits after suffering a myocardial infarction, contending it was causally related to his job activities. Initially, a referee found in favor of the claimant, but the Workers’ Compensation Board later rescinded the award. The Board referred the claimant to an impartial cardiologist, Dr. Dean, for an opinion on causal relation. Based on Dr. Dean’s report and testimony, the Board disallowed the claim, a decision which the court affirmed. The court found substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision, noting that both Dr. Dean and Dr. Walters testified the claimant suffered a transmural myocardial infarction, not a subendocardial one, which cannot be caused by work effort.

Workers' CompensationMyocardial InfarctionCausationMedical TestimonyImpartial CardiologistSubendocardial InfarctionTransmural Myocardial InfarctionWork-Related InjuryAppellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
0
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

Claim of Wallace v. Nestles Chocolate Co.

The claimant appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision denying death benefits for her decedent, a forklift operator who died post-surgery for a work-related hand injury. The decedent experienced respiratory and cardiac arrest due to myocardial infarction, exacerbated by pre-existing conditions and inadequate postoperative care. The Board concluded the death was not causally related to the compensable injury. The appellate court affirmed the decision, finding that while the surgery provided the occasion for inadequate treatment, it did not directly cause the death, which stemmed from the progression of his underlying cardiac condition.

Workers' CompensationMyocardial InfarctionPostoperative ComplicationsCausationPreexisting ConditionInadequate Medical CareAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionDeath BenefitsHand Injury
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Hart v. Fiber Conversion, Inc.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision regarding a decedent employed by Fiber Conversion, Inc. The decedent suffered an acute anterior wall myocardial infarction while at work and subsequently died. Testimony from his son and widow indicated the arduous nature of his work on the day of the incident. Medical testimony supported a causal link between his work activity and the infarction. The Board found the work precipitated the myocardial infarction, leading to a work-related accident, disability, and death. The decision was affirmed, as there was substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination.

Workers' CompensationMyocardial InfarctionWork-Related InjuryCausal RelationshipMedical TestimonySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionOccupational DiseaseDeath Claim
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Baldassari v. Greenwich Mills Co.

This case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision from December 6, 1977, which reversed a referee's finding by determining that the claimant's decedent's death was not causally related to their work. The core issue was conflicting medical testimony regarding the cause of death. The treating physician linked it to work effort via a myocardial infarction, while Doctor Cutler and Doctor Fischl, an impartial specialist, testified that death resulted from unrelated abdominal disease and found no evidence of myocardial infarction. The court affirmed the Board’s determination, finding that the testimony of Doctor Cutler and Doctor Fischl provided substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion.

Workers' CompensationCausal RelationshipMedical TestimonyMyocardial InfarctionAbdominal DiseaseConflicting EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewAffirmation
References
1
Showing 1-10 of 7,157 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