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. ADJ1812869 (SAC 0356491)
Regular
Nov 10, 2010

DIVINA EMANO vs. UC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTER; Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted by SEDGWICK, CMS

This case involves applicant Divina Emano claiming a left carpal tunnel injury against UC Davis Medical Center. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the previous decision. Specifically, Finding of Fact No. 8 was modified to clarify that while no further treatment is needed for the left carpal tunnel injury, other industrial injuries will require reasonable and necessary medical treatment. The Board expressed surprise at the defendant's contention regarding the carpal tunnel injury, noting their prior stipulation and a relevant physician's report.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDDIVINA EMANOUC DAVIS MEDICAL CENTERSEDGWICK CMSOPINION AND ORDERGRANTING RECONSIDERATIONDECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATIONleft carpal tunnel injuryindustrial injuriesWCJ report
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 26, 2013

Claim of Hunter v. Tops Market, Inc.

The case involves an appeal concerning the transfer of liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a. The claimant had an established workers' compensation claim for right carpal tunnel syndrome, with a later diagnosis of left carpal tunnel syndrome. Despite a 10% schedule loss of use for the right hand, the employer's request to transfer liability was denied by the Workers' Compensation Board. The Board ruled that the case was never truly closed because issues regarding the left carpal tunnel syndrome remained unresolved, as evidenced by a doctor's report. The Appellate Division affirmed this decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the finding that further compensation proceedings were still contemplated, thereby preventing the transfer of liability.

Workers' Compensation Law § 25-aSpecial Fund for Reopened CasesCarpal Tunnel SyndromeOccupational DiseaseSchedule Loss of UseTransfer of LiabilityCase ClosureBoard Decision AffirmedAppellate DivisionNerve Conduction Study
References
7
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 06836
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 26, 2019

Matter of Christensen-Mavrigiannakis v. Nomura Sec. Intl., Inc.

Claimant Deborah Christensen-Mavrigiannakis sustained a workplace injury from a fall, initially establishing claims for neck and back injuries. The Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) later amended the claim to include a left shoulder injury and subsequently bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and right cubital tunnel syndrome, along with awards at a temporary total disability rate. On appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the WCB's decision regarding the left shoulder injury, citing substantial evidence based on the treating physician's testimony. However, the court reversed the WCB's amendment for the carpal tunnel and cubital tunnel syndromes, finding the medical opinion supporting causal relationship irrational. The Appellate Division upheld the WCB's finding of total disability and associated awards, acknowledging the Board's authority to modify prior decisions.

Workers' CompensationCausal RelationshipMedical EvidenceLeft Shoulder InjuryCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCubital Tunnel SyndromeIndependent Medical Examination (IME)Workers' Compensation Board (WCB)Appellate ReviewSubstantial Evidence
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 28, 2008

Aminzadeh v. Hyosung USA

The claimant, a machine operator, sustained a left hand injury in 2005. During treatment for this injury, she was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome in her left wrist. A separate claim for carpal tunnel syndrome was established as an unrelated occupational disease, with a disablement date of June 2007 by a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this decision. The employer’s workers’ compensation carrier appealed the Board’s ruling on the date of disablement. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding that the selection of June 2007 as the date of disablement was supported by substantial evidence, as the condition was objectively diagnosed then.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeDate of DisablementSubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewLeft Hand InjuryMachine OperatorMedical DiagnosisBoard Decision
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Scuderi v. Mazzco Enterprises

Claimant, a union carpenter, filed a workers' compensation claim in 2010 for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, which was deemed an occupational disease with a disability onset of June 25, 2010. The workers’ compensation carrier for his last employer, Mazzco Enterprises, sought to apportion liability among claimant’s previous employers, including JD Consulting LLC. The Workers’ Compensation Board ultimately determined the disease was contracted on August 14, 1998, and assigned 45% of the liability to JD Consulting and its carrier. JD Consulting and its carrier appealed, contending that the Board's selection of the contraction date lacked substantial evidentiary support, as the claimant could not recall the onset of symptoms and his treating physician provided no definitive opinion on the matter. The Appellate Division concurred, reversing the Board's decision and remitting the case for further proceedings due to the insufficient evidence supporting the chosen date of contraction.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeApportionment of LiabilityEmployer LiabilitySubstantial EvidenceAppellate ReviewReversalRemittalNew York Law
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2006

Claim of McKenzie v. UJA-FED

Claimant, employed in data entry, developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and sought workers' compensation benefits. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially dismissed the claim, but the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding the condition to be an occupational disease causally related to employment, based on agreement between the treating physician and an independent medical examiner, and the carrier's failure to request cross-examination. The carrier appealed, arguing the Board erred in its finding regarding cross-examination and mischaracterized medical evidence. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, ruling that the carrier waived its right to cross-examination by not making a timely request and finding no basis to disturb the Board's assessment of the medical evidence.

Occupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeWorkers' CompensationMedical EvidenceCross-Examination WaiverAppellate ReviewCausationEmployment-Related InjuryMedical Expert TestimonyBoard Decision Appeal
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 29, 2004

Velella v. New York Local Condotional Release Commission

The petitioners, including Gonzalez, Caba, Stephens, Velella, and DelToro, challenged determinations by the Conditional Release Commission and the Department of Correction. These determinations advised petitioners that their conditional releases were invalid and directed them to surrender. The Supreme Court, New York County, denied their five CPLR article 78 petitions. This appellate court unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, finding the petitioners' conditional releases illegal due to non-compliance with Correction Law § 273 (1) and (6). The court also ruled that the agencies had the power to set aside determinations based on significant irregularities and that the petitioners had no substantive due process right to illegal orders, having been afforded adequate procedural due process through the CPLR article 78 proceedings.

Conditional ReleaseCorrection Law ViolationsDue ProcessArticle 78 PetitionAgency AuthorityIllegal ReleaseStatutory InterpretationAppellate ReviewGovernment EstoppelNew York Law
References
14
Case No. 525453
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 05, 2018

Matter of Gullo v. Wireless Northeast

Claimant Vanessa L. Gullo, a quality assurance supervisor, filed for workers' compensation benefits due to bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, which she attributed to her extensive computer use. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially found a causally-related occupational disease, but the Workers' Compensation Board subsequently reversed this decision, ruling that her condition was not employment-related. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Board's decision, citing that the Board misread the record regarding the treating hand surgeon's opinion on causation. Specifically, the Board overlooked the surgeon's consistent opinion on causality after being informed of claimant's specific work duties and ignored a progress note detailing his examination and review of a nerve conduction study for left carpal tunnel syndrome. The matter was therefore remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings to properly assess the claim.

Carpal Tunnel SyndromeOccupational DiseaseWorkers' Compensation BenefitsCausalityMedical EvidenceTreating Physician OpinionIndependent Medical ExaminationBoard Decision ReversalAppellate ReviewRemittal for Further Proceedings
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Feliciano v. New York City Health & Hospitals Co.

Claimant sought workers' compensation benefits for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Initially, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge ruled the left hand claim time-barred by Workers' Compensation Law § 28 and established August 28, 2006, as the disability date for the right hand. On appeal, the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed the right hand's disability date but, on its own motion, set December 2003 as the disability date for the left hand, thereby confirming the left hand claim was untimely. The claimant appealed, arguing against two disability dates for a single claim. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence supported treating the hand injuries as discrete occupational diseases with separate disablement dates and upheld the time-bar for the left hand claim.

Workers' CompensationOccupational DiseaseCarpal Tunnel SyndromeTime-barred ClaimDate of DisablementBilateral InjuriesAppellate ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardJudicial ReviewStatute of Limitations
References
6
Case No. 2023 NY Slip Op 00899, 534614
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 16, 2023

Matter of Marcellino v. National Grid

Claimant Joseph Marcellino appealed a Workers' Compensation Board decision finding no permanent injury to his left elbow and denying a schedule loss of use (SLU) award for it, and affirming no SLU for his left thumb. Claimant had established injuries from an April 2015 accident, including to his left elbow and thumb, and underwent surgery in 2016. His treating orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Christoforou, initially opined significant SLU percentages in 2017. However, an August 2020 examination by Dr. Spohn, retained by the carrier, found no range of motion deficits for the left hand, wrist, or thumb, suggesting 0% SLU for these, though he did suggest 15% SLU for carpal tunnel syndrome based on guidelines. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge credited Dr. Spohn's opinion, a finding affirmed by the Board, which discounted Dr. Christoforou's conflicting opinions due to inconsistencies in his own prior findings. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, stating that the Board has discretion to resolve conflicting medical opinions and reject evidence, even if unopposed.

Workers' CompensationSchedule Loss of UsePermanent Partial DisabilityMedical Opinion CredibilityOrthopedic SurgeryLeft Elbow InjuryLeft Thumb InjuryCarpal Tunnel SyndromeAppellate ReviewMedical Evidence
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 2,066 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