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 Huss v. Tops Markets, Inc.

In 1985, claimant sustained a right shoulder injury while employed by Dunlop Tire, resulting in a permanent partial disability. In 1998, he re-injured the same shoulder while working for Tops Markets, Inc., leading to a new workers' compensation claim. An impartial specialist attributed 85% of the disability to the 1985 injury and 15% to the 1998 injury. Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially rejected apportionment, the Board reversed and applied the 85/15 apportionment. Claimant appealed, contending apportionment was unwarranted due to his disclosure of the prior injury and lack of prior disability symptoms. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial medical evidence to support the apportionment.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityApportionmentPrior InjuryShoulder InjuryCausal RelationshipMedical Expert TestimonyBoard DecisionAppellate ReviewExacerbation
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 19, 1980

Claim of Pollara v. Air France

The Workers' Compensation Board ruled that the claimant's permanent partial disability stemmed entirely from a May 20, 1976, accident, precluding apportionment despite a prior 1953 back injury. The claimant, a former Navy boiler tender, had undergone back surgery in 1953 but returned to full duty and subsequently worked over two decades in physically demanding roles without significant issues until the 1976 incident at an airline. The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence, including medical testimony, supported the finding that the claimant had no pre-existing compensable disability at the time of the 1976 injury. The court noted that apportionment is inapplicable when a prior condition did not constitute a compensation-related disability.

ApportionmentDisabilityBack injuryLaminectomyPre-existing conditionWorkers' CompensationMedical testimonySubstantial evidencePermanent partial disabilityAppellate review
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Davis v. Reagan

This consolidated appeal addresses whether permanent total disability can be awarded in Tennessee when an anatomical disability rating is below 16.7 percent. The Supreme Court reconciles conflicting panel decisions, specifically overruling Seiber v. Greenbrier Industries, Inc. The court holds that the limitations outlined in Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-241, which apply to permanent partial disability awards, do not extend to permanent total disability claims. The decision affirms the trial courts' judgments, allowing individuals like Vernon Ray Davis and Bessie Lou Rayfield to receive permanent total disability benefits despite having anatomical impairment ratings under 16.7 percent.

Permanent Total DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityWorkers' Compensation ActAnatomical Impairment RatingStatutory InterpretationTennessee LawConsolidated AppealVocational DisabilityEmployee RetentionLegislative Intent
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Rice

This is a worker's compensation case where the insurance carrier appealed a jury verdict granting total and permanent disability benefits to an injured worker. The worker sustained a low back injury, necessitating a chymopapain injection, and continued employment post-injury, even with increased pay and a more strenuous schedule. However, medical testimony and evidence from safety directors suggested that due to his injury and surgery, the worker was permanently disabled from obtaining similar employment elsewhere, being deemed to have a "Class 4 back." The appellate court affirmed the judgment, emphasizing the liberal construction of worker's compensation laws and that continued work does not automatically preclude findings of total and permanent disability. The court found the evidence factually sufficient to support the jury's finding of permanent total incapacity.

Worker's CompensationBack InjuryLumbar StrainHerniated DiscChymopapain InjectionPermanent DisabilityTotal IncapacityMedical EvidenceEmployment PhysicalsTexas Law
References
5
Case No. 2019-01-0630
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 28, 2020

Ferguson, Anne Michelle v. Amazon.com, Inc.

Anne Michelle Ferguson, an Amazon employee, sought permanent total disability and medical benefits for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) after injuring her left foot at work in October 2017. Amazon contended that benefits should be limited to a foot contusion and sought a credit for overpayment of temporary partial disability benefits. The Court weighed competing medical expert opinions, ultimately giving greater weight to Dr. Dreskin's diagnosis of compensable CRPS. Consequently, the Court awarded Ms. Ferguson permanent partial disability benefits of $8,858.13 and ongoing medical benefits, including access to a panel of CRPS specialists. However, her claim for permanent total disability was denied as she was deemed capable of sedentary work, and Amazon received a credit for previously overpaid temporary benefits.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityComplex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)Medical BenefitsVocational DisabilityMaximum Medical Improvement (MMI)Temporary Partial DisabilityPain ManagementMedical Expert TestimonyFoot Injury
References
5
Case No. 2017-08-0024
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 19, 2020

Thomas, Alisha v. Federal Express Corp.

Alisha Thomas filed a Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD) seeking permanent total disability benefits or additional permanent partial benefits, which Federal Express Corp. disputed. The Court ruled that Ms. Thomas is entitled to increased permanent partial disability benefits under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-207(3)(B) because she had not returned to work by the expiration of her initial compensation period, and her treating physician, Dr. Melvin Goldin, attributed her condition to the work injury at that time. However, the Court denied claims for additional benefits under section 50-6-242 and permanent total disability, as Dr. Goldin's later testimony revealed Ms. Thomas's condition had evolved beyond the initial somatic symptom disorder, and he could not definitively connect her advanced symptoms to the work injury at the time of the award. The awarded increased benefits totaled $3,379.01.

Permanent Partial DisabilitySomatic Symptom DisorderImpairment RatingRes JudicataMental Injury CompensabilityIncreased BenefitsSocial Security DisabilityTreating Physician TestimonyCausation StandardSettlement Agreement
References
5
Case No. 2017-06-1778
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2018

Demotte, Julie v. UPS

Julie Demotte sustained a workplace injury involving a broken hip and leg in November 2016 while working for UPS. UPS initially accepted the claim and provided temporary disability benefits. Dr. Jason Evans, the authorized treating physician, placed Ms. Demotte at maximum medical improvement and assigned a three-percent whole-person impairment rating. A compensation hearing was held to determine Ms. Demotte's entitlement to permanent disability, temporary disability, and future medical benefits. The Court ordered UPS to provide lifetime medical benefits for Ms. Demotte's workplace injury, but denied her claims for both temporary and permanent disability benefits. The denial of permanent disability was based on the inadmissibility of Form C-30A as proof of impairment, as Ms. Demotte failed to present admissible evidence. Additionally, the claim for further temporary disability benefits was denied due to an earlier overpayment by UPS that exceeded any subsequent amounts due.

Workplace InjuryFuture Medical BenefitsTemporary Disability BenefitsPermanent Disability BenefitsAdmissibility of Medical ReportsForm C-30AForm C-32Impairment RatingHearsayMaximum Medical Improvement
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Lloyd v. New Era Cap Co.

The claimant, a sewing machine operator, suffered a permanent low back injury in a 2003 workplace fall, leading to an award of workers' compensation benefits. The self-insured employer sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund, arguing for apportionment of the disability with a preexisting 1975 gunshot wound. However, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge and the Board denied this request, finding the claimant to have a permanent total disability solely due to the 2003 accident, thus precluding reimbursement under Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d). The appellate court affirmed the Board's decision, emphasizing the Board's authority to reclassify disabilities and its non-binding nature of party stipulations that are not properly approved. The court found substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that the 2003 accident alone caused the permanent total disability.

Workers' CompensationSpecial Disability FundReimbursementPermanent Total DisabilityPreexisting ImpairmentApportionmentMedical EvidenceBoard AuthorityStipulationAppellate Review
References
17
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 29, 1980

Claim of Butts v. Ward La France Trucking Corp.

The Workers’ Compensation Board found claimant’s disability to be 45% attributable to a March 1976 work accident, 10% to an August 1977 nonrelated accident, and 45% to a November 1977 work accident. The employer's carrier for the second work accident appealed the 45% apportionment. The court found no substantial evidence to support the Board's apportionment, citing testimonies from Dr. Burke, who attributed 90% of disability to the first work accident, and Dr. Corradini, who believed the first accident's disability ended by January 1977 and the current disability was primarily from the nonrelated accident. Consequently, the Board's decision was reversed, and the matter was remitted for further proceedings.

Disability ApportionmentWork-Related InjuryNon-Related InjuryMedical Expert TestimonySubstantial Evidence ReviewWorkers' Compensation BoardAppellate ReviewReversal of DecisionRemittal for Further ProceedingsInsurance Carrier Dispute
References
0
Case No. ADJ7936482
Regular
Apr 20, 2020

EXTELA MONTIEL vs. MICRO SOLUTIONS, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration to further study factual and legal issues concerning an applicant's permanent disability award. Key disputes involve the correct permanent disability indemnity rate, with the defendant arguing for a lower weekly rate based on the injury date, and the validity of the $60\%$ permanent disability finding due to conflicting medical opinions. The Board found deficiencies in the medical evidence regarding psychiatric permanent disability and issues with the apportionment of that disability. Consequently, the Board deferred resolution of temporary disability, the EDD lien, permanent disability, apportionment, and the permanent disability rate pending further record development.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardSupervising assemblerAdmitted industrial injuryNon-admitted injuryCervical spinePsychePermanent disabilityLabor Code section 4658(d)GAF
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 10,303 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