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 Adams v. Owens Corning Fiberglass

The Special Disability Fund appealed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision from November 23, 1999, which had discharged the Fund from liability under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8). Initially, a WCB panel ruled that the employer’s carrier was entitled to reimbursement for a claimant's preexisting coronary artery disease. Although the Fund's appeal to this Court was dismissed for failure to prosecute, the full Board later rescinded the panel's decision, finding the carrier's reimbursement claim failed to specify coronary artery disease as a preexisting disability. This Court affirmed the full Board's decision, asserting the Board's plenary authority under Workers’ Compensation Law § 123 to modify its decisions, even after an appeal dismissal. The Court emphasized strict adherence to claim form requirements, noting the carrier's form lacked specific mention of the coronary artery disease, thereby denying the reimbursement claim.

Special Disability FundWorkers' Compensation BoardReimbursementPreexisting DisabilityCoronary Artery DiseaseFailure to ProsecuteBoard AuthorityClaim Form ComplianceAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation Law
References
5
Case No. ADJ7941925 (VNO 0120392) ADJ2139821 (VNO 0472608)
Regular
Mar 25, 2013

KIM A. ALLEN vs. CITY OF PASADENA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the WCJ's decision, and returned the case to the trial level. The defendant argued that the WCJ erred in finding industrial causation for the applicant's coronary artery disease, citing res judicata and the issue not being properly raised. However, the Board found no substantial medical evidence supported the finding of industrial injury for the current condition, necessitating further proceedings. The applicant had prior stipulated awards for heart conditions, but the coronary artery disease was alleged as a new problem.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCity of PasadenaPermissibly Self-InsuredFindings of FactInjury AOE/COECoronary Artery DiseaseCardiovascular SystemFirefighterCumulative PeriodRes Judicata
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Acrison, Inc. v. Schenck Corp.

This is a patent infringement action where Acrison, Inc. alleges that Schenck Corporation infringed two of its patents for "loss-in-weight" feeder systems. These systems utilize microprocessor circuitry to maintain a steady discharge rate by mitigating external disturbances. Schenck moved for summary judgment, asserting non-infringement, specifically challenging the interpretation of Element H of Claim 1 of the 102 patent concerning signal comparison and disturbance response. The court found no literal infringement but denied summary judgment, concluding that a reasonable jury could find equivalence between the two systems under the doctrine of equivalents, and rejected Schenck's arguments regarding file history estoppel and independent patentability.

Patent infringementLoss-in-weight feederMicroprocessor circuitryDoctrine of equivalentsSummary judgmentClaim interpretationFile history estoppelDigital circuitryAnalog circuitryIndustrial control systems
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 19, 1969

Claim of Mulholland v. New York State Department of Public Works

The case involves an appeal by a claimant whose husband, an engineer for the New York State Department of Public Works, died from coronary arteriosclerosis after experiencing significant emotional stress. The stress stemmed from an upcoming experimental meeting and a dilemma regarding the falsification of inventory data to prevent dissipation of stockpiled goods. The appellant contended that this emotional strain was a causal factor in his fatal coronary occlusion. However, the Workmen’s Compensation Board denied benefits, a decision affirmed on appeal. The court ruled that the emotional strain described was not greater than the ordinary stress workers occasionally face, thus not qualifying as an accidental injury under the Workmen’s Compensation Law.

Emotional StressCoronary OcclusionWorkers' Compensation BenefitsAccidental Injury ClaimCausationEmployment-Related StressBoard Decision ReviewJudicial ReviewFatal InjuryWork-Related Death
References
2
Case No. ADJ9126761
Regular
Jul 28, 2014

Jennifer James vs. CITY OF SANTA ROSA, Permissibly Self-Insured, Administered by REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns Jennifer James, a police officer injured on duty, who sought additional benefits under Labor Code Section 4850. The core dispute is whether Section 4850 benefits, providing a leave of absence without loss of salary for up to one year, should be paid for a calendar year or until the equivalent of a full year's salary has been received. The majority affirmed the WCJ's decision, ruling that the one-year limitation is based on the duration of payments, not the total salary amount. A dissenting opinion argued that the intent of Section 4850 is to ensure no loss of salary, thus allowing benefits to continue until the equivalent of a full year's salary is paid, especially for injured public safety officers.

Labor Code section 4850temporary partial disabilitymodified dutiespolice officerwage loss benefitssalary continuationaggregate disability paymentsEason v. City of RiversideKosowski v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.County of Alameda v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Leveski v. Dic Underhill Joint Venture

The claimant, employed by Die Underhill Joint Venture as a drill runner, developed pneumoconiosis (silicosis) due to his occupation and also suffered from coronary artery disease. He stopped working in December 1975 and applied for workers' compensation benefits for silicosis. The Workers' Compensation Board initially found him totally disabled by his non-work-related coronary condition, rescinding a referee's award, a decision the claimant did not appeal. In August 1979, the claimant sought to reopen his case, but the Board denied this application in February 1980. The appellate court affirmed the Board's denial, ruling that the claimant failed to demonstrate a change of condition or present newly discovered evidence as required for reopening a case.

Workers' CompensationSilicosisOccupational DiseaseCoronary Artery DiseaseMedical TreatmentReopening CaseAppellate ReviewAbuse of DiscretionChange of ConditionNewly Discovered Evidence
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Vann v. Daniels & West, Inc.

The case involves an appeal from a Workers’ Compensation Board decision, filed February 10, 1977, and amended October 7, 1977, which denied death benefits to a decedent’s widow. The decedent, a driver, veered off the road and struck a tree, but did not suffer significant injuries from the crash itself. An autopsy revealed his death was due to coronary thrombosis, and he had pre-existing arteriosclerotic heart disease. Conflicting medical testimony was presented regarding whether the coronary event preceded and caused the accident, or if the death was from natural causes unrelated to the employment accident. The Board found the death unrelated. The appellate court affirmed the Board’s decision, stating it was supported by substantial medical evidence.

Coronary ThrombosisArteriosclerotic Heart DiseaseDeath BenefitsWorkers' Compensation AppealMedical CausationConflicting Medical TestimonySubstantial EvidenceAccident Unrelated to DeathNatural CausesAutopsy Report
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Action Electrical Contractors Co. v. Goldin

This appeal addresses a contractor's obligation to provide supplemental fringe benefits under Labor Law § 220 for public works projects. Petitioner, Action Electrical Contractors Co., Inc., was charged by the Comptroller of New York City for failing to provide prevailing supplemental benefits. The core issue was whether cash payments directly to employees could fulfill this obligation, rather than solely providing equivalent in-kind benefits. The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division, ruling that the Comptroller's interpretation prohibiting cash substitutes was arbitrary. The court concluded that legislative intent focused on equalizing minimum labor costs, which is satisfied by cash payments equivalent to the cost of prevailing supplements, and thus, the petitioner had complied with the law.

Public Works ContractsPrevailing WageFringe BenefitsSupplemental BenefitsLabor Law § 220Cash EquivalentCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployer ComplianceStatutory InterpretationAdministrative Determination
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 05, 1981

Claim of Tienken v. Dancing Waters, Inc.

The claimant appealed a decision from the Workers’ Compensation Board concerning her husband's death in 1976 due to acute thrombosis of the right coronary artery. Medical experts disagreed on whether his death was work-related; the claimant's expert and an impartial specialist found work activities contributory, while the employer's expert attributed it to pre-existing coronary artery disease. The Board ruled that the death resulted from the natural progression of the disease, not work-related causes. The court affirmed the Board's decision, stating that the conflicting medical evidence created a factual issue for the Board to resolve. The court also found no merit in the claimant's argument that the Board applied the wrong test, concluding that the decision was supported by substantial evidence.

Workers' Compensation Boardmedical expertscausal relationcoronary artery diseaseacute thrombosiswork-related deathsubstantial evidencefactual issueBoard decision affirmedAppellate Division
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. City of Rochester

This reargument addresses the constitutionality of Ordinance 82-450, which mandates that contractors maintain registered apprenticeship training programs, without allowing cash equivalents in lieu of training. The court affirmed the ordinance's constitutionality, distinguishing it from Matter of Action Elec. Contrs. Co. v Goldin, which permitted cash equivalents for fringe benefits under Labor Law § 220 (3). The decision emphasizes that the ordinance's purpose is to cultivate skilled craftsmen and encourage training, a goal incompatible with cash substitutions. Such an allowance would diminish the benefits of training programs for apprentices, the trade, and the community. The court concluded that equating cash payments with apprenticeship programs would undermine legislative intent, as the underlying policy differs significantly from that of fringe benefit equalization. Consequently, the judgment was modified to declare Ordinance 82-450 constitutional and affirmed, with a dissenting opinion from Justice Doerr.

Ordinance 82-450Apprenticeship Training ProgramsConstitutional ChallengePublic ContractsPrevailing WagesFringe BenefitsLabor LawGeneral Municipal LawStatutory InterpretationLegislative Purpose
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 122 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