Division Reserved Decisions

Handschuh v. New York Daily News
01-39058 decided February 8, 2007 by the Honorable Diana Ferriero, J.W.C.
The judge determined the petitioner’s permanency award as 60% partial total for disability orthopedic, pulmonary, neurological, and neuropsychiatric in nature as a result of injuries suffered while working near the World Trade Center at the time of the 9/11 attack.  However, the judge also concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to reimbursement for the costs of unauthorized treatment and prescriptions under N.J.S.A. 34:15-15 because the petitioner presented no proof he requested them from the respondent before obtaining them.

Martinez v. R Tape Corporation 
02-36835 decided November 16, 2006 by the Honorable Peter F. Womack, J.W.C.
Petitioner alleged permanent orthopedic, otological, ophthalmologic, and pulmonary disabilities resulting from occupational exposures to pressure/weight, noise, and airborne irritants.  However, the judge dismissed all four allegations in the claim petition because the medical evidence presented by the petitioner was insufficient to sustain his burden of proof.  

Jimenez v. MDM Technologies, Inc.
01-26867 decided August 18, 2005 by the Honorable Peter F. Womack, J.W.C.
Petitioner alleged numerous occupational injuries in her claim petition, but at the beginning of trial decided to proceed only on her orthopedic claims. But after examining the medical facts underlying the opinion offered by the petitioner’s orthopedic expert, the compensation judge found that the petitioner failed to sustain her burden of proving permanent disability with objective medical evidence.  

Giordano v. A. Giordano & Sons
02-28595 decided November 29, 2005 by the Honorable Diana Ferriero, J.W.C.
Because respondent failed to give proper notice about the existence of surveillance videotapes prior to the start of trial (as required by N.J.A.C. 12:235-3.9), the judge denied its offer to admit the tapes into evidence and decided on the nature and extent of petitioner’s permanent disability without reviewing those tapes.  

Ingram v. Bloomingdale Bd. of Education 
98-22367; 01-27271; decided September 12, 2005 by the Hon. Stephen Tuber, J.W.C.
Petitioner alleged orthopedic and psychiatric disabilities resulted from a work-related accident and subsequent supervisory harassment.  The compensation judge found that, while the petitioner did prove the merit of awarding compensation based on the orthopedic claim, she failed to meet her burden of proof in regard to the psychiatric claim.   

Nevers v. Continental Airlines
01-7864 decided on March 14, 2005 by the Honorable Lawrence G. Moncher, J.W.C.
Prior to his work-related injury, which he suffered while working as a part-time airplane loader for the respondent, the petitioner was able to work this part-time job as well as a full-time job for a different employer.  After the accident, the petitioner no longer was able to do either job, and as a result, saw a permanent reduction in his earning capacity. Following the rule set forth in the Katsoris case, the Judge of Compensation reconstructed the petitioner’s wage rate for purposes of computing the permanent partial disability award to which the petitioner was entitled.

Paulson v. Knoble Constr.
01-24811 decided November 29, 2004 by the Honorable Stephen Tuber, J.W.C.
After looking at the petitioner as a whole person, and arriving at his finding of permanent disability based upon consideration of how the petitioner’s various disabilities have impacted working ability and the pursuit of ordinary life activities, the compensation judge awarded the petitioner permanent disability benefits.

Santos v. Tyco Plastics
02-37834 decided November 18, 2004 by the Honorable Peter F. Womack, J.W.C.
After carefully reviewing the medical evidence for demonstrable objective evidence, the compensation judge found that the petitioner failed to prove permanent disability based on an alleged pulmonary disability. However, the judge did find that the petitioner presented sufficient demonstrable objective medical evidence to meet his burden of proving an otological disability due to tinnitus.

Ortiz v. Ikea Holdings
2002-25239 decided on July 30, 2004 by the Honorable George Geist, J.W.C.
Petitioner who suffered a work-related amputation of all the transmetatarsals of his left foot sought an amputation bonus of 30% under N.J.S.A. 34:15-12(c) (21), in addition to the 100% of the foot that the respondent had agreed to pay under N.J.S.A. 34:15-12(c) (10).  Following the reasoning in Martinez v. Silverline, 361 N.J. Super. 99 (App. Div. 2003) which was a loss of fingers case, the Judge of Compensation concluded that the petitioner qualified for an award of the amputation bonus. 

Truair v. County of Monmouth 
96-17311 decided on February 10, 2004 by the Honorable Lawrence G. Moncher, J.W.C.
Petitioner sought an increase in the permanent disability that was previously awarded by the Division.  The respondent denied the increase and also argued that the petitioner should be barred from receiving periodic disability benefits because he was already receiving an ordinary disability pension.  In the alternative, the respondent argued that it should get a credit against the ordinary disability pension for the benefits it had already willingly paid the petitioner.  The Judge of Compensation disagreed with respondent’s arguments and granted the petitioner an increase in permanent disability and allowed periodic benefits to be paid, while denying the respondent’s request for a credit.  

Gardner v. 21 Plus, Inc.
CP # 97-11718; decided November 17, 2003 by the Honorable Emille R. Cox, J.W.C.
In March of 1999, petitioner received a permanent partial award for injuries she suffered in a work-related car accident.  In March of 2002, petitioner timely filed an application for review and modification of her award, alleging increased pain and disability.  However, the compensation judge found that there was insufficient evidence for granting petitioner’s application - neither the testimony of the petitioner nor the reports of her treating and evaluating doctors proved that there was any increase in her disability.  As a result, the judge denied the application and dismissed the re-opened claim petition.

Gann v. State of New Jersey 
99-2343 decided on November 4, 2003 by the Honorable Lawrence G. Moncher, J.W.C.
Petitioner filed a claim for increased permanent disability based on the latest of a series of accidents/assaults involving psychiatric patients alleged to have injured the petitioner’s back.  Respondent asserted the Workers’ Compensation Fraud Act (N.J.S.A. 34:15-57.4) by alleging that the petitioner gave false testimony during a previously settled case by withholding information about an intervening accident.  The Judge of Compensation found that the respondent failed to prove that the petitioner deceived the Court or hid information during his earlier testimony and awarded the petitioner an award for increased permanent disability.  A credit for prior permanent disability awards was allowed for the respondent.

Bubenheimer v. General Motors
94-037447,97-013935, decided April 29, 2003 by the Honorable Barbara Van Horn Colsey, J.W.C. Petitioner filed an Application for Review and Modification of a prior award. Based on her testimony and the testimony of both neurological evaluators that she currently suffered from a neurological deficit not present at the time of the prior award, the workers’ compensation judge held that the petitioner established an increased disability.

Brown v. Tingley Rubber Corp.
94-13115 and 97-12518, decided January 29, 2003 by the Honorable Barbara Van Horn Colsey, J.W.C. These claims for accidental and occupational injuries were extensively evaluated by the judge of compensation who found that petitioner was entitled to an award for the accident and separate pulmonary and carpal tunnel awards for the occupational disabilities.

Silva v. Custom Bandag
91-13746, decided January 12, 2003 by the Honorable Stephen Tuber, J.W.C. 
While the judge of compensation did not find total and permanent disability as claimed, the judge did determine that petitioner was entitled to compensation of 60% permanent partial total. The judge also denied petitioner's odd lot claim.  

Pino vs. County of Ocean
87-15748 & 88-28055, decided July 22, 2002 by the Honorable Lawrence G. Moncher, J.W.C.
Petitioner had a series of work related accidents and a subsequent non-work automobile accident. While petitioner claimed to be totally and permanently disabled from his employment disabilities, the judge of compensation found petitioner 70% permanently disabled from the work accidents and the automobile accident also contributed to his problems.