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. ADJ1834869
Regular
Feb 10, 2014

GREGORY CLEVELAND vs. CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration regarding permanent disability (PD) awarded to the applicant. The Board adopted the findings of the administrative law judge, noting the defendant's failure to cross-examine the rater on the calculation of PD, which included instructions to consider overlap of heavy lifting. Furthermore, the Board admonished the defendant for attaching documents to its petition in violation of board rules. The applicant was awarded PD based on restrictions from heavy lifting for his cervical spine and right shoulder.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDCITY OF LOS ANGELESPERMISSIBLY SELF-INSUREDPETITION FOR RECONSIDERATIONDENIEDRATING INSTRUCTIONSOVERLAPVERY HEAVY LIFTINGAPPORTIONMENTLABOR CODE §4664
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Krull v. United States

Michael Krull, an employee of JJJ Express Mail, sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries sustained on October 17, 2007, while delivering mail to the Irving Post Office. Krull alleged negligence by the United States Postal Service (USPS) after renovations to the post office's rear door created a safety hazard. The new outward-opening door obstructed a steel plate on a hoist lift, forcing Krull to manually lift the heavy plate multiple times daily, which allegedly caused a lower back injury. The government moved for summary judgment, arguing Krull could not establish negligence and that his injury resulted from an ordinary hazard of employment. The court denied the government's motion, finding that lifting the steel plate was not part of Krull's regular duties and that USPS's alteration prevented him from performing his work as intended, thus raising a genuine issue of material fact regarding negligence.

Federal Tort Claims ActNegligenceSummary JudgmentLandowner DutyForeseeabilityPersonal InjuryWorkplace InjuryPostal ServiceHoist LiftDoor Renovation
References
15
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00385
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 26, 2023

Taopanta v. 1211 6th Ave. Prop. Owner, LLC.

Plaintiff, a construction worker, was severely injured (finger severed) while manually lifting a heavy door without adequate safety devices, which violated Labor Law § 240 (1). The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed a lower court's denial of partial summary judgment, finding that the absence of appropriate lifting devices directly caused the injury due to the application of gravitational force, a harm Labor Law § 240 (1) is designed to prevent.

Labor Law § 240 (1)Construction AccidentPersonal InjurySummary JudgmentGravitational ForceSafety DevicesAppellate ReviewWorkplace SafetyDebris RemovalForeman Testimony
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 11, 1977

La Mountain v. Alice Hyde Hospital Ass'n

Claimant, a 53-year-old nurse's aide, sustained injuries leading to rectocele and cystocele while lifting a patient. Medical consensus confirmed these conditions prevent heavy lifting, resulting in a 50% permanent partial disability as found by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The employer's insurance carrier argued that pre-existing back issues contributed to the disability, but failed to provide medical evidence to support this claim. The Board's factual finding regarding the work-related disability was ultimately affirmed on appeal.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityRectoceleCystoceleEarning Capacity ReductionNurse's Aide InjuryMedical OpinionPre-existing ConditionsCausation of DisabilityAppellate Review
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Furlin v. V. A. W. of America

The claimant, a furnace operator, suffered a myocardial infarction on October 18, 1973, after performing arduous and strenuous work activities, including lifting heavy metal bars and stirring molten metal with a heavy rake. He was diagnosed with a heart attack after experiencing chest pains during his shift. The Workers' Compensation Board determined that his disability was a result of a work-related accident, despite a pre-existing heart condition. This decision was appealed, challenging the finding of strenuous effort and causal relationship. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, concluding that there was substantial evidence to support the finding that the claimant's work was strenuous and directly contributed to his heart injury, even with conflicting medical testimony.

Workers' CompensationMyocardial InfarctionHeart AttackWork-Related InjuryStrenuous EffortCausal RelationshipAppellate ReviewBoard DecisionSubstantial EvidencePre-existing Pathology
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Satalino v. Dan's Supreme Supermarket

This decision affirms the Workers' Compensation Board's determination that the claimant failed to establish a recognizable link between his occupational disease and employment. The claimant, diagnosed with disc herniation, arthritis, spondylolisthesis, and stenosis, presented testimony from two neurological surgeons. Dr. Stephen Burstein could not definitively link the conditions to employment, noting potential causes like chronic degeneration or age. Dr. Artem Vaynman, while performing surgeries, opined that heavy lifting accelerated degeneration but also acknowledged an initial view of no employment relation and a lack of scientific evidence for repetitive lifting causing spinal injury. The court found no abuse of discretion in the Board's conclusion, emphasizing the requirement for a probable and rationally based causal relationship.

Occupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation LawCausal RelationshipMedical OpinionDisc HerniationArthritisSpondylolisthesisStenosisHeavy LiftingDegenerative Condition
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Perez v. Mondial Tiles, Inc.

Claimant, a marble floor laborer, experienced dizziness and saw lights on March 5, 2007, while carrying a heavy marble floor, leading to headaches and blurry vision. He later underwent a craniotomy and shunt placement due to a blood clot. After filing for workers' compensation, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge initially found no causal relationship between his work and injuries. However, the Workers’ Compensation Board reversed this, establishing a causal relationship. The carrier appealed this decision. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence in the medical opinions of treating physicians Dr. Larry Neuman and Dr. Spencer Golden, who both linked the claimant's stroke, cervical radiculopathy, and subsequent disability to the work-related straining and heavy lifting incident.

Workers' CompensationCausal RelationshipStrokeCervical RadiculopathyHeavy LiftingDizzinessHemorrhagic StrokeCraniotomyAppellate Division
References
7
Case No. 2025 NYSlipOp 06656
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 02, 2025

O'Brien v. Tectonic Bldrs. Inc.

Plaintiff Kevin O'Brien, a marble-floor finisher, sustained shoulder injuries after tripping on a damaged makeshift ramp at a Manhattan construction site. The ramp, serving as a passageway, had been compromised by a heavy mechanical lift, causing its lower end to lift 2-3 inches off the floor. The Supreme Court initially denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on his Labor Law § 241 (6) claim. The Appellate Division modified this order, granting partial summary judgment, finding that the damaged ramp constituted a trippable obstruction in a passageway and working area, violating Industrial Code § 23-1.7 (e)(1) and (2). The court rejected the defendants' arguments regarding the 'integral to the work' defense and comparative negligence.

Labor Law Section 241 (6)Industrial Code ViolationsTrip and Fall AccidentConstruction Site InjuryPassageway HazardWorking Area SafetyPartial Summary Judgment GrantedComparative Negligence Defense RejectedIntegral to Work Doctrine InapplicableRamp Damage
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 13, 2012

Hart v. Astrue

Plaintiff Robert L. Hart appealed the denial of his Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits application. The District Court, reviewing a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, reversed the Commissioner of Social Security's decision. Senior District Judge Thomas J. McAvoy found that the Administrative Law Judge erred by not affording controlling weight to the plaintiff's treating physician's opinion, which restricted heavy lifting to under 15 pounds, contradicting the ALJ's finding that the plaintiff could occasionally lift 20 pounds. Furthermore, the ALJ improperly afforded minimal weight to a non-medical disability analyst's opinion and failed to consult a vocational expert despite evidence of non-exertional limitations. The case was remanded for further proceedings to correctly assess the plaintiff's residual functional capacity.

Disability BenefitsSocial Security ActALJ ErrorTreating Physician RuleResidual Functional CapacityVocational ExpertNon-Exertional LimitationsMedical OpinionRemandDistrict Court Review
References
32
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Marin v. San Martin Restaurant, Inc.

The defendant appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Queens County, which had denied its motion for summary judgment in a personal injury case. The injured plaintiff, a sanitation worker, and his wife initiated the action after the worker allegedly sustained injuries while lifting an overloaded garbage bag from the defendant's restaurant. They claimed the defendant created a dangerous condition and failed to provide a safe place to work. The appellate court determined that the hazard of lifting heavy garbage bags is inherent in a sanitation worker's duties and that an owner typically does not owe a duty to protect employees from hazards stemming from a contractor's methods without supervisory control. Given that the injured plaintiff opted to perform his task without assistance despite having resources, the court reversed the lower court's order, granted the defendant's motion, and dismissed the complaint.

Personal InjurySanitation WorkerSummary JudgmentAssumption of RiskWorkplace HazardOwner LiabilitySupervisory ControlAppellate ReviewPremises LiabilityDuty to Warn
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 366 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