Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ3582743 (STK 0215397)

Regular

Apr 11, 2014

KERI LARSEN vs. MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT

This case concerns defendant Modesto Irrigation District's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, finding the administrative law judge erred in using an incorrect impairment number for calculating permanent disability. The Board amended the award to reflect an 18% permanent disability rating, based on the agreed medical evaluator's opinion regarding lateral epicondylitis and decreased grip, not nerve entrapment. The Board also corrected the finding for future medical treatment to the right arm and elbow, aligning with the amended disability rating.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardModesto Irrigation DistrictKerri Larsenpermanent disability ratingAMA GuidesAlmarez-Guzmanstraight ratingReport And Recommendation On Petition For ReconsiderationAgreed Medical EvaluatorAME

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Clanton v. Salon Visentin, Inc.

Claimant, a former shampooer and full-time receptionist, developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and right epicondylitis. She sought workers' compensation benefits, claiming her injuries were an occupational disease due to strenuous repetitive movements associated with her employment. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and subsequently the Workers’ Compensation Board denied her claim, finding insufficient evidence of a recognizable link between her condition and a distinctive feature of her occupation. The appellate court affirmed the Board's determination, concluding that the record supported the finding that there was insufficient evidence of a specific repetitive movement suggesting a link between her job and injuries.

Occupational diseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeEpicondylitisRepetitive motion injuryWorkers' compensation benefitsCausal relationshipMedical evidenceSufficiency of evidenceAppellate reviewBoard decision

References

Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 04940 [197 AD3d 1379]

Regular Panel Decision

Sep 02, 2021

Matter of Bigdoski v. Bausch & Lomb

Barbara Bigdoski, a customer service representative, developed bilateral shoulder impingement and right lateral epicondylitis, which she attributed to extensive typing. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge found her condition to be a causally-related occupational disease with a disablement date of June 20, 2019, a decision affirmed by the Workers' Compensation Board. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending the condition was related to her workspace configuration rather than repetitive motion. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's finding, citing competent medical evidence establishing a link between Bigdoski's work and her condition, and rejected the carrier's arguments.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseShoulder ImpingementEpicondylitisRepetitive MotionCausally RelatedMedical EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewJudicial Review

References

Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 03890

Regular Panel Decision

Jul 20, 2023

Matter of Perry v. DOCCS Clinton Corr. Facility

Claimant Robert Perry, a correction officer, initially filed a workers' compensation claim in January 2017 for injuries to his left hand and wrist. This claim was established, leading to an award for schedule loss of use of his left hand in September 2019. Subsequently, in May 2020, Perry was diagnosed with left elbow epicondylitis, which he sought to include as a causally-related injury to his existing claim. The employer and carrier argued the amendment was untimely under Workers' Compensation Law § 28. While a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially permitted the amendment, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, deeming the left elbow claim time-barred due to not being filed within two years of the original accident. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that the Board properly found no evidence of an injury to the left elbow in claimant's medical records prior to May 2020, and that the Board, as the sole arbiter of credibility, was free to prioritize medical records over claimant's conflicting testimony regarding earlier elbow pain, thus upholding the denial of the claim and the subsequent denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation LawTimeliness of ClaimLeft Elbow InjuryMedical MisdiagnosisSchedule Loss of UseWorkers' Compensation Board DecisionAppellate DivisionCorrectional OfficerClaim AmendmentStatute of Limitations

References

Showing 1-4 of 4 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

KERI LARSEN vs. MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT

Clanton v. Salon Visentin, Inc.

Occupational diseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeEpicondylitisRepetitive motion injuryWorkers' compensation benefitsCausal relationshipMedical evidenceSufficiency of evidenceAppellate reviewBoard decision

Matter of Bigdoski v. Bausch & Lomb

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseShoulder ImpingementEpicondylitisRepetitive MotionCausally RelatedMedical EvidenceSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewJudicial Review

Matter of Perry v. DOCCS Clinton Corr. Facility