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. 2022 NY Slip Op 05567 [209 AD3d 1073]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 06, 2022

Matter of Vicente (Finger Lakes DDSO)

Elliot Vicente, a claimant with a work-related permanent partial disability from 2007, sought reclassification to permanent total disability under Workers' Compensation Law § 35 (3) due to extreme hardship, as his indemnity benefits were nearing exhaustion. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially granted his application, which the Workers' Compensation Board affirmed. The employer and its carrier appealed, contending insufficient evidence, particularly regarding anticipated Social Security disability benefits. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's decision, finding that substantial evidence supported the finding of extreme hardship based on the claimant's significant financial shortfall in meeting monthly obligations and his documented inability to secure new employment.

Workers' Compensation LawExtreme Hardship RedeterminationPermanent Partial DisabilityWage-Earning Capacity LossIndemnity Benefit ExhaustionSocial Security Disability OffsetsFinancial StrainVocational LimitationsAppellate Division ReviewSubstantial Evidence Standard
References
4
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 04413 [162 AD3d 1286]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 14, 2018

Matter of Tobin v. Finger Lakes DDSO

Kristi M. Tobin, a support aide, sustained injuries in April 2012 after being assaulted by a client, leading to a workers' compensation claim established for various injuries including reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD)/complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) of her right face. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge initially awarded schedule loss of use for vision loss and facial disfigurement. The Workers' Compensation Board reversed this decision, classifying claimant's RSD/CRPS and ptosis as a nonschedule permanent partial disability under Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (3) (w), rescinding the prior awards, and remitting the case for further record development regarding loss of wage-earning capacity. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed the Board's determination, finding substantial medical evidence supported the nonschedulable permanent partial disability classification due to the claimant's ongoing chronic pain and worsening ptosis, consistent with not receiving both schedule loss of use and nonschedule permanent partial disability awards for the same work-related accident.

Workers' Compensation LawPermanent Partial DisabilitySchedule Loss of UseReflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD)Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)Facial DisfigurementWage-Earning CapacityAppellate ReviewMedical EvidenceSubstantial Evidence
References
9
Case No. CA 12-01210
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 08, 2013

NEW YORK FINGER LAKES REGION POLICE, MTR. OF

Petitioner appeals an order denying its petition to vacate an arbitration award. The arbitration award determined that the respondent, City of Auburn, did not violate the terms of the collective bargaining agreement when it terminated the employment of one of petitioner’s members. The court reiterated that an arbitration award may only be vacated if it is irrational, violates strong public policy, or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on the arbitrator’s power. The court found that the arbitrator's interpretation of the CBA was not irrational and did not alter its terms, thus not exceeding his authority. Therefore, the order denying the petition to vacate the arbitration award was unanimously affirmed.

Arbitration AwardCollective Bargaining AgreementEmployment TerminationIrrational AwardPublic Policy ViolationArbitrator AuthorityAppellate ReviewVacate ArbitrationLabor DisputeJudicial Review of Arbitration
References
6
Case No. 2022 NY Slip Op 04520
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 08, 2022

Parkison v. KBM Mgt., Inc.

Plaintiff, Lisa Parkison, commenced an action seeking damages arising from consulting services provided by defendant KBM Management, Inc., related to the Wayne Finger Lakes School Workers' Compensation Plan. Defendant appealed from an order that granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the breach of contract cause of action. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, reversed the Supreme Court's order, concluding that the plaintiff failed to meet her initial burden. Specifically, the plaintiff did not establish as a matter of law that any damages were proximately caused by the alleged breach of contract by the defendant. Consequently, the order insofar as appealed from is reversed, and the motion for summary judgment is denied.

Breach of ContractSummary JudgmentWorkers' Compensation PlanAppellate ReviewProximate CauseDamagesConsulting ServicesWayne Finger Lakes School Workers' Compensation Plan
References
3
Case No. ADJ10127986
Regular
May 28, 2019

SAMANTHA SILVA vs. HILMAR CHEESE, SAFETY NATIONAL INSURANCE

This case concerns the compensability of Voltaren gel prescribed for the applicant's bilateral hand, wrist, and trigger finger injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the original findings. The Board found that the critical issue was whether the generic equivalent of Voltaren gel was exempt from utilization review (UR), not solely the brand name's formulary status. The matter was returned for further proceedings to clarify the issues and for a new decision on the eligibility of the generic Voltaren gel.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardUtilization ReviewMedical Treatment Utilization ScheduleMTUSDrug FormularyExempt DrugGeneric DrugBrand Name DrugVoltaren GelFindings of Fact
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 19, 2019

Winder v. Berryhill

Plaintiff Anne Winder challenged the Social Security Administration's denial of disability insurance benefits, alleging disability due to carpal tunnel syndrome, trigger fingers, bipolar disorder, and type II diabetes. The case, initially heard by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who found Winder not disabled, proceeded to the District Court after the Appeals Council denied review. Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields recommended affirming the Commissioner's decision, which the Plaintiff objected to, challenging the ALJ's severe impairment finding, evaluation of medical opinions from treating and examining physicians (Dr. Healy, Dr. Rudansky, Dr. Johnkutty) versus a medical expert (Dr. Fuchs), and credibility assessment. Presiding Judge Arthur D. Spatt reviewed the objections, adopting the R&R and affirming the Defendant's decision, finding no clear error in the ALJ's conclusions regarding the Plaintiff's functional capacity and ability to perform other work.

Social Security DisabilityAdministrative LawDisability BenefitsReport and RecommendationMedical Opinion EvaluationCredibility AssessmentResidual Functional CapacityFive-Step Sequential EvaluationCarpal Tunnel SyndromeBipolar Disorder
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 31, 2006

Magadan v. Interlake Packaging Corp.

The plaintiff, a factory worker, sustained personal injuries while operating an S3A 7/8” Book Stitcher, leading to a lawsuit against the manufacturer (Interlake Packaging Corporation), its successor (Samuel Strapping Services), and the seller (Suburban Graphic Supply Corp.). The injury occurred when her finger was caught by the machine's needle due to an improperly adjusted finger guard. Initially, the Supreme Court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding no design defect. However, the appellate court partially reversed this decision, concluding that triable issues of fact existed regarding the defendants' failure to provide adequate warnings about operating the machine without proper finger guard adjustment. Furthermore, the court found triable issues concerning the defendants' post-sale duty to warn about safety modifications.

Personal InjuryProducts LiabilityNegligenceDesign DefectFailure to WarnSummary JudgmentAppealFactory Worker InjuryMachine SafetyPost-Sale Duty to Warn
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Deck v. Dorr

This is a dissenting opinion concerning a Workers' Compensation Board's amended decision regarding a schedule loss of use (SLU) award. The claimant had already received a 100% SLU award for the loss of four fingers on their right hand and was granted an additional 100% SLU for their right thumb. The dissenting judge, Aarons, J., argues that there was a lack of substantial medical evidence to support the additional award for the thumb, as the claimant's surgeon did not explain how the thumb injury was separate and distinct from the injury to the other four fingers, which resulted from a single incident. The dissent highlights that the New York State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment and Loss of Wage Earning Capacity specify that the loss of all fingers at proximal phalanges equates to 100% loss of use of the hand. Based on this, the dissenting judge would have reversed the portion of the amended decision granting the additional SLU for the thumb, although the final order stated the amended decision was affirmed.

schedule loss of useSLU awardright hand injurythumb amputationfinger amputationworkers' compensation boarddissenting opinionmedical evidencepermanent impairmentwage earning capacity
References
3
Case No. STK 0194292
Regular
Apr 02, 2008

HERIBERTO ZEPEDA vs. SIERRA CONSERVATION CENTER, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration of a WCJ's decision that the 2005 permanent disability rating schedule applied to applicant Heriberto Zepeda's bilateral wrist and elbow injury. Applicant argued that prior industrial disability leave payments in 2004 triggered an exception requiring the 1997 schedule. The Board found these payments were for medical examinations and did not necessitate the notice required to trigger the exception, thus affirming the applicability of the 2005 schedule.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardCumulative trauma injuryPermanent and stationary2005 rating schedule1997 rating scheduleIndustrial disability leaveLabor Code section 4061Labor Code section 4660(d)Labor Code section 4600(a)(1)Temporary disability
References
1
Case No. ADJ9365173
Regular
Jun 19, 2017

MARIA LOPEZ vs. GENERAL WAX CO. INC., TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA

The Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration, affirming the finding of permanent total disability for the applicant. The applicant sustained admitted industrial injuries including a partial finger amputation, hypertension, gastrointestinal issues, and a psychiatric injury. The Board found that the finger amputation constituted a "violent act" under Labor Code section 4660.1(c), making the applicant's psychiatric impairment compensable. The defendant's arguments regarding stale medical records and insufficient vocational expert analysis were rejected due to lack of proper citation and contradictory evidence in the record.

AOE/COEPermanent Total DisabilityPsychiatric InjuryLabor Code 4660.1(c)Violent ActCatastrophic InjuryVocational ExpertApportionmentSubstantial Medical EvidencePetition for Reconsideration
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 308 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