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. ADJ11207109; ADJ11207111
Regular
May 29, 2025

Darren Hailey vs. Continental Labor, National Union Fire Insurance Company

Applicant Darren Hailey sought reconsideration of two Findings and Awards from October 19, 2021, in cases ADJ11207109 and ADJ11207111, where a WCJ found industrial injuries but apportioned 50 percent of permanent disability to nonindustrial factors based on a Qualified Medical Evaluator's (QME) opinion. Hailey contended that the QME's apportionment opinion was not substantial medical evidence. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, in a majority decision, affirmed the WCJ's findings, concluding that the QME adequately explained the basis of his apportionment, attributing 50 percent of the impairment to nonindustrial obesity due to its role in inhibiting recovery and causing accelerated wear and tear on joints. However, Commissioner Katherine A. Zalewski dissented, agreeing that the QME identified the factors of permanent disability but arguing that he failed to adequately explain how he arrived at the 50 percent apportionment figure, deeming the analysis incomplete.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityApportionmentQualified Medical Evaluator (QME)Industrial InjuryNonindustrial FactorsCausationSubstantial Medical EvidenceObesity
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Kurz v. St. Francis Hospital

The defendants moved to preclude plaintiffs' expert testimony on causation or, alternatively, for a pretrial hearing regarding the plaintiff's vision loss. The plaintiff developed visual disturbances shortly after receiving Amiodarone intravenously following cardiac bypass surgery in 2008. Defendants argued a lack of scientific evidence linking short-term Amiodarone use to optic neuropathy, while the plaintiff's expert contended that rapid drug absorption could cause optic disc edema, a known side effect. Furthermore, the plaintiff highlighted medical records where defendant physicians themselves initially attributed the vision loss to the medication. The court, applying the Frye standard, determined that general causation—Amiodarone causing vision loss—is an established medical theory. It further ruled that the specific causation tests from Parker and Cornell, typically applied to toxic tort cases, were not strictly applicable here due to the distinct nature of medical malpractice. Consequently, the court denied the defendants' motion, finding an adequate foundation for the admissibility of the plaintiff's expert testimony, with any disputes regarding specific timing affecting only the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.

Medical MalpracticeExpert TestimonyCausationAmiodaroneOptic NeuropathyVision LossMotion in LimineFrye StandardParker StandardCornell Standard
References
9
Case No. ADJ7324566
Regular
Apr 09, 2013

BRANDON CLARK DECEASED, JOVELYN CLARK (WIDOW), GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR JOANNA CLARK (MINOR CHILD), BRITTANY CLARK (MINOR CHILD), BENJAMIN CLARK (MINOR CHILD) vs. SOUTH COAST FRAMING, INC., REDWOOD FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a death claim where the decedent, Brandon Clark, died from combined toxic effects of sedating drugs. The defense argued that industrially prescribed medications did not significantly contribute to the death, but the Board upheld the finding that the industrially prescribed amitriptyline was a contributing factor. The Board found ample evidence supported industrial causation, rejecting the defense's attempt to limit causation solely to non-industrial medications and their untimely raised claim of intentional overdose.

Death ClaimIndustrial InjuryReconsiderationWidows BenefitsMinor DependentsToxicologyDrug InteractionCausationExpert OpinionMedical Examiner
References
0
Case No. ADJ8701916
Regular
Jan 30, 2015

CHRISTOPHER RICE vs. CITY OF JACKSON, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted by YORK SERVICES GROUP, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to review the administrative law judge's apportionment of the applicant's permanent disability. The applicant, a police officer injured on the job, argued that the Qualified Medical Evaluator's apportionment to genetic factors was not supported by substantial evidence. The Board agreed, finding that apportionment to immutable genetic factors was impermissible and that the QME's opinion lacked sufficient reasoning on the specific causation of the disability. Consequently, the Board amended the decision to defer the issue of permanent disability and returned the matter for an unapportioned award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardChristopher RiceCity of JacksonYork Services GroupCumulative traumaNeck injuryPolice officerPermanent disabilityApportionmentPanel Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME)
References
0
Case No. ADJ7087449
Regular
Nov 02, 2012

ELVIRA VASQUEZ vs. DEL MONTE FOODS, ZURICH INSURANCE

This case involves a workers' compensation claim by Elvira Vasquez against Del Monte Foods. The defendant sought reconsideration of a prior Appeals Board decision that found applicant sustained an industrial injury and that the defendant failed to prove intoxication was the proximate cause. The defendant argued the applicant's amphetamine use was established and impaired her function, making it a substantial factor in the injury. The Appeals Board denied reconsideration, holding that a positive drug test alone is insufficient to prove intoxication or causation, citing precedent that requires further evidence of impaired function or substantial evidence of causation.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryLabor Code Section 3600(a)(4)Proximate CauseIntoxicationBurden of ProofAmphetaminesDrug TestImpaired Function
References
1
Case No. ADJ3449073 (LBO 0392250) ADJ3573639 (LBO 0393361)
Regular
Sep 17, 2012

STEPHEN KEMBLE vs. BAY VIEW PUMBING AND HEATING, ENDURANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of prior decisions that apportioned the applicant's 100% permanent disability between two industrial injuries and non-industrial factors. The Board found the psychiatric Agreed Medical Examiner's opinion unsubstantial due to a lack of review of pre-injury records and a misunderstanding of apportionment duties. Consequently, the matter was returned to the trial level for further proceedings, including appointing a new medical examiner to address causation and apportionment issues more thoroughly. The Board emphasized the need for a fully developed record on complex medical causation concerning the psyche injury.

ReconsiderationFindings and AwardsIndustrial InjuryRight KneeLow BackBoth FeetPsychePlumberPermanent DisabilityApportionment
References
7
Case No. ADJ3023725 (STK 0186210) ADJ 6853419
Regular
Mar 03, 2016

IGNACIO ROA vs. ROHRER BROTHERS/GENERAL PRODUCE; FREMONT COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, administered by SEDGWICK; XL SPECIALTY/BROADSPIRE; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns applicant Ignacio Roa's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award finding 20% permanent disability for a right knee injury with 50% apportionment to nonindustrial factors. Roa also sought to establish an industrial injury to his left knee as a consequence of the right knee injury and a cumulative trauma injury to both knees, which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied. The Board affirmed the judge's findings, relying on Dr. Henrichsen's opinion that Roa's left knee symptoms were due to the natural progression of prior surgery and wear, not industrial factors. A dissenting opinion argued for further medical development, finding persuasive evidence of industrial contribution to the left knee condition.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIgnacio RoaRohrer BrothersFremont Compensation Insurance CompanyCIGAXL SpecialtyState Compensation Insurance Fundpermanent disabilityapportionmentnonindustrial factors
References
5
Case No. CA 16-02017
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 28, 2017

DOMINICK, NICHOLAS v. CHARLES MILLAR & SON CO.

Plaintiffs Nicholas Dominick and Lorraine J. Dominick initiated an action against the Millar defendants, alleging injuries Nicholas sustained due to asbestos exposure from products supplied by the defendants. A jury found the Millar defendants liable for failing to provide adequate warnings regarding asbestos hazards, deeming this a substantial factor in causing Nicholas's injuries. The defendants-appellants appealed, contesting the sufficiency of evidence for causation and the preclusion of certain witnesses. The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, upheld the lower court's judgment. The appellate court found the expert testimony sufficient to establish specific causation, rejected claims of improper witness preclusion, and affirmed the jury's apportionment of fault and the awarded damages for future pain and suffering.

Asbestos ExposurePersonal InjuryProduct LiabilityFailure to WarnCausationJury VerdictAppellate ReviewSufficiency of EvidenceExpert TestimonyWitness Preclusion
References
16
Case No. 10-CV-4079
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 02, 2013

Sass v. MTA Bus Co.

Plaintiff Gary Sass sued his former employer, Metropolitan Transportation Authority Bus Company (MTA Bus), alleging retaliation in violation of Title VII, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL. A jury initially found in favor of Sass, awarding him damages. However, shortly after the verdict, the Supreme Court issued its decision in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, which established a stricter "but-for causation" standard for Title VII retaliation claims, replacing the previous "motivating factor" standard. Based on this new precedent, MTA Bus moved for a new trial. The Court denied MTA Bus's motion for judgment as a matter of law but granted a new trial, ruling that the Nassar standard applied retroactively and necessitated a re-evaluation of the causation element under the correct legal framework.

RetaliationTitle VIIJury InstructionsNew TrialBut-for CausationMotivating FactorFederal Rules of Civil Procedure 50Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59Supreme Court PrecedentRetroactive Application
References
51
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Steam Pipe Explosion at 41st St. & Lexington Ave.

This dissent arises from an appeal in consolidated pretrial proceedings concerning damages from a 2007 steam pipe explosion owned by Con Ed. Con Ed, a defendant, sought discovery from Team Industrial Services, Inc. (also a defendant) regarding records from the 2001 "Diamond Shamrock litigation" in Texas, arguing similarity in causation due to excessive sealant application. The Supreme Court denied this motion after an in camera review, finding insufficient similarity. The appellate majority reversed, granting Con Ed's motion to compel, but the dissenting judge, Friedman, J.P., argues this was an abuse of discretion. The dissent emphasizes the Supreme Court's thorough analysis of the distinct mechanisms of causation in the two incidents, concluding that the common factor of excessive sealant is superficial and the Diamond Shamrock files are irrelevant to the current matter.

Discovery DisputeAppellate ReviewJudicial DiscretionIn Camera ReviewConsolidated ProceedingsSteam Pipe ExplosionSealant ApplicationCausation MechanismPrior Litigation SimilarityPretrial Proceedings
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 1,603 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