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
Nov 17, 1977

Daigneault v. Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp.

The Workers’ Compensation Board found that the claimant developed chronic bronchitis precipitating emphysema, which was causally related to their employment due to exposure to irritating factors, leading to disability. This decision, filed on November 17, 1977, was appealed. The appellate court affirmed the board's determination, concluding that there was substantial medical evidence to support the finding. Costs were awarded to the Workers’ Compensation Board against the self-insured employer.

Chronic BronchitisEmphysemaCausally Related EmploymentDisabilityMedical EvidenceWorkers' Compensation AppealSelf-Insured EmployerBoard Decision
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Lawson v. Employers Insurance

Russell C. Lawson, an employee, sued his employer's insurance carrier under the Tennessee Workmen's Compensation Law for an occupational disease. He claimed long hours and irregular shifts caused chronic anxiety and hypertension, disabling him on September 19, 1969. While doctors confirmed his condition was linked to shift work, the court ruled that shift work or long hours during a strike were not "risks connected with employment" under T.C.A. 50-1101. Furthermore, Tennessee law had not recognized psychological injury without traumatic injury. The court also found Lawson not disabled as he could perform his work on regular shifts. Consequently, the suit was dismissed.

Occupational DiseaseChronic AnxietyHypertensionShift WorkWorkers' CompensationPsychological InjuryTraumatic InjuryDisabilityStatute of LimitationsTennessee Law
References
6
Case No. 530186
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 08, 2020

Matter of Turner v. New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision

Claimant Holly Turner sought workers' compensation death benefits following the passing of her husband, a former correction officer with a permanent partial disability. The Workers' Compensation Board denied the claim, finding no causal relationship between his employment and death. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed this decision, rejecting the application of the Workers' Compensation Law § 21 (1) presumption because the death occurred years after employment ceased and was not unwitnessed. The court further concluded that the medical opinion provided by the decedent's pain management specialist, Anuj Sharma, lacked sufficient evidentiary basis as he admitted to not reviewing crucial medical records, including those detailing chronic hypertension and noncompliance with treatment.

Death BenefitsCausal RelationPermanent Partial DisabilityHypertensive Heart DiseaseSedentary LifestyleWeight GainSmokingChronic HypertensionPresumption of CompensabilityMedical Evidence Sufficiency
References
6
Case No. Docket Entry No. 1, No. 18, No. 22
Regular Panel Decision

Lewis v. Barnhart

Plaintiff Derbera Ann Lewis sought judicial review after an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and the Appeals Council denied her application for Title XVI supplemental security income (SSI) benefits. Lewis claimed disability due to multiple impairments, including chronic back pain, hypertension, diabetes, and depression. The court considered cross-motions for summary judgment from Lewis and the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. The review focused on whether the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence regarding Lewis's medical condition, subjective complaints, and residual functional capacity. Ultimately, the court denied Lewis's motion for summary judgment, granted the Commissioner's motion, and affirmed the Commissioner's decision to deny benefits, finding it supported by substantial evidence on the record.

Social Security DisabilitySSI BenefitsAdministrative Law JudgeSummary JudgmentSubstantial Evidence ReviewMedical ImpairmentsMental Retardation ClaimResidual Functional CapacityVocational Expert TestimonyPsychiatric Evaluation
References
63
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 18, 1997

Claim of De Salvo v. Prudential Insurance

The claimant, an insurance salesperson, stopped working in January 1992, citing disability from hypertension and an anxiety disorder. Initial medical reports from Dr. Andrew Greenberg and an unnamed psychiatrist suggested that the claimant's high-stress job exacerbated his hypertension and caused a psychiatric condition. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found prima facie evidence for these conditions. However, the carrier's medical expert, Carl Friedman, attributed the hypertension to lifestyle factors. After further proceedings, including the Workers’ Compensation Board restoring the case to allow the claimant to present more evidence, the claim was ultimately denied. The appellate court affirmed this decision, concluding that the claimant failed to provide competent medical evidence to establish a causally related psychiatric disability and that his own physician's report indicated his hypertension was not caused by his job.

HypertensionAnxiety DisorderPsychiatric DisabilityCausationMedical EvidencePro Se RepresentationAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardMedical Expert TestimonyExacerbation of Preexisting Condition
References
1
Case No. ADJ8508948
Regular
Apr 04, 2014

JOHN GIESE vs. COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, SEDGWICK CMS

The applicant sought reconsideration for additional benefits related to his hypertension, claiming it was a work-related heart injury under Labor Code sections 3212 and 3212.5. The Board denied reconsideration, affirming the judge's finding that hypertension alone, without end-organ damage, is not considered "heart trouble" for the purposes of these presumptions. Medical evidence indicated the applicant had no loss of cardiac function due to coronary artery disease and that the cause of his hypertension was complex and not demonstrably work-related. Therefore, his petition was denied.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationCumulative Industrial InjuryCardiovascular SystemSheriff's DepartmentTemporary DisabilityPermanent DisabilityHypertensionPresumption of CompensabilityLabor Code Sections 3212
References
3
Case No. ADJ10825156
Regular
Jul 28, 2025

RAMON MUNOZ vs. THE EDWARD THOMAS COMPANY, TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted defendant's Petition for Reconsideration to address a clarification regarding attorney's fees. The Board affirmed the WCJ's Findings and Award, which found applicant sustained injury to the right knee and hypertension, denied apportionment for hypertension, and disallowed credit for temporary disability overpayment. The Board specifically found that the defendant failed to meet its burden for hypertension apportionment. The only amendment made was to explicitly state that attorney's fees should be held in trust pending the filing of a fee disclosure statement.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardRight Knee InjuryHypertensionApportionmentTemporary Disability OverpaymentAttorney FeesFee Disclosure StatementPanel Qualified Medical Examiner
References
7
Case No. ADJ7683112
Regular
May 16, 2016

EUFEMIA TELLEZ vs. PEREZ CONTRACTING, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board granted the applicant's petition for reconsideration, reversing the judge's exclusion of a medical report and remanding issues of hypertension and sleep disorder for further development of the record. While the judge correctly excluded the late-filed medical report, substantial medical evidence was lacking regarding the industrial causation of the applicant's hypertension and sleep disorder. The Board affirmed the judge's findings on other accepted injuries and permanent disability but deferred issues related to hypertension and sleep disorder, returning the case for further proceedings on those specific conditions.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationFindings Award and Orderssubstantial medical evidenceinadmissible evidencedevelopment of the recordPQMEhypertensionsleep disorderdiabetes
References
0
Case No. ADJ4129353 (VNO 0559667)
Regular
Jun 09, 2010

DONALD GRIFFIN vs. CITY OF TORRANCE, Permissibly Self-Insured

This case involves a firefighter claiming industrial injury to hypertension, cardiovascular, spine, and gastrointestinal systems. The defendant sought reconsideration, arguing the WCJ erred in denying apportionment for the applicant's hypertensive heart disease and spine injury. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the orthopedic apportionment by the Agreed Medical Examiner was too speculative. The Board also found the WCJ correctly relied on the internal medicine AME's opinion to conclude the hypertensive heart disease resulted from a single cumulative trauma period.

WCABADJ4129353VNO 0559667firefighterhypertensioncardiovascularspine injurygastrointestinalpermanent disabilityapportionment
References
8
Case No. ADJ6456347
Regular
Jan 30, 2012

MARK WILLIAMS vs. CITY OF PASADENA

This case involves a police officer claiming industrial injury to his heart due to hypertensive heart disease, a condition he argued was distinct from previously compensated hypertension. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded the administrative law judge's decision, finding the claim was not barred by res judicata. The WCAB clarified that while hypertension alone is not considered heart trouble, left ventricular hypertrophy, as diagnosed in the current claim, constitutes a distinct condition. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings on other unresolved issues.

res judicatahypertensive heart diseasepolice officerLabor Code section 3212.5heart trouble presumptionleft ventricular hypertrophystipulated awardindustrial injurypermanent disabilityapportionment
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 487 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