Case Name:	Aguirre v. WCAB		07/22/1991
Summary:	He conceded that in that event the applicant would have subsequently come into his office to sign the compromise and release agreement. He next testified that he had no present recollection of when Mr. Aguirre came into his office to sign the settlement papers and no present recollection of what he said to Mr. Aguirre about the content of the settlement agreement. Mr. Chavez later denied having said that he told applicant a future injury in rehabilitation might exceed the amount of the settlement. Mr. Chavez ultimately testified that he recalled personally reading verbatim to Mr. Aguirre the language purporting to waive benefits for any future injuries sustained during rehabilitation and asking Mr. Aguirre if he understood what had been read to him; Mr. Aguirre answered yes, and there was thereafter no need for Mr. Chavez to explain the compromise and release. Mr. Chavez finally conceded that he could not explain why his signature did not appear on that copy of the document.
Note:	Compromise/release of liability for future injuries sustained during rehab. must be express, clear to applicant.
Citation:	232 Cal. App. 3d 744, 56 CCC 420
WCC Citation:	WCC 25691991 CA

Case Name:	Aitken v. Pacific Steel Casting Co.		02/07/2011
Summary:	Charles J. Aitken v. Pacific Steel Casting Co, No. A126395 (Cal. App. Dist. 1 02/07/2011) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR A126395 February 7, 2011 CHARLES J. AITKEN, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. PACIFIC STEEL CASTING CO. , DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. INTRODUCTION Appellant Charles J. Aitken appeals from the trial court's ruling granting respondent Pacific Steel Casting Co. 's motion for summary judgment. (Marsh v. Tilley Steel Co. (1980)26 Cal. 3d 486, 493 (Marsh); Kowalski v. Shell Oil Co. (1979) 23 Cal. 3d 168, 175 (Kowalski). )It was Plant Maintenance, and not Pacific Steel, who paid appellant directly. In his deposition, appellant states that he "needed some tools that they didn't have at Pacific Steel .
Note:	Exclusive remedy barred a worker's suit against a borrowing employer after it proved that he was a special employee, the 1st District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	A126395
WCC Citation:	WCC 37152011 CA

Case Name:	Alberda v. Board of Retirement of Fresno County Employees' Retirement Assoc.		02/20/2013
Summary:	ALBERDA v. BOARD OF RETIREMENT OF FRESNO COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION THOMAS ALBERDA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF RETIREMENT OF FRESNO COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Respondent. The Board of Retirement of Fresno County Employees' Retirement Association (Board) denied Thomas Alberda's application for a service-connected disability retirement. The knee did not require ongoing treatment; Alberda passed his Fresno County pre-employment physical as well as the physical requirements of the law enforcement academy. On April 4, 2008, the Board denied the application and instead approved the grant of a non-service connected disability retirement if Alberda wished to apply for one. Dr. Morgan, a board certified orthopedic surgeon who also performed independent medical evaluations, examined Alberda on November 4, 2009, and prepared a report.
Note:	A Fresno County deputy sheriff is getting a second chance at proving his entitlement to a service-connected disability retirement since the trial judge who upheld the administrative denial of his application applied the wrong standard of review to the Fresno County Employees' Retirement Association's decision.
Citation:	F064017
WCC Citation:	WCC 39882013 CA

Case Name:	Albertson's v. WCAB (Bradley)		04/29/1982
Summary:	We granted a writ of review in this case to consider whether an employee's claim of a cumulative injury (Lab. When she returned to work, Bassinger's attitude toward her appeared to have changed; he was now "very curt with [her]. "Bradley was "so embarrassed that [she] just wanted to die," and she rapidly began to experience difficulty breathing, shaking and nausea. She told Bassinger she was sick and wished to see her doctor; he responded, in a "very nasty" tone, "'[w]hatever suits you. '"Her doctor gave her a tranquilizer and kept her at his office for four or five hours after this incident.
Note:	Honest misperception of job harassment may mix with pre-existing psychiatric condition so as to cause compensable job stress, but must be supported by competent evidence.
Citation:	131 Cal.App.3d 308
WCC Citation:	WCC 31161982 CA

Case Name:	Albillo vs. Intermodal		12/11/2003
Summary:	Named plaintiffs and appellants Irwin Albillo and Luis Montoya are class representatives of the appellant class of independent contractor truck owners and owner-operators, who contracted to transport freight for defendants and respondents Intermodal Container Services, Inc. , Intermodal Container Services, Inc. doing business as Harbor Rail Transport, Interstate Consolidation, Inc. , and Interstate Consolidation, Inc. doing business as Cartage Service. The two primary companies are Intermodal Container Service, Inc. and Interstate Consolidation Service, Inc. [FN 2] A division of Intermodal does business as Harbor Rail Transport; a division of Interstate does business as Cartage Service. Intermodal motor carriers, or trucks, are a critical link in the intermodal chain, as they are the only effective means of moving trailers or containers from marine and rail terminals. Appellants Irwin Albillo and Luis Montoya filed the operative first amended complaint on April 8, 1999, on behalf of themselves and similarly-situated individuals. The companies' founders sold their interest in Intermodal and Interstate to Pacer International in 1997, after this lawsuit was initiated.
Note:	It is unlawful for a company to enter into a contract with an independent contactor and then require the independent contractor to pay the cost of workers' compensation insurance premiums.
Citation:	114 Cal.App.4th 190
WCC Citation:	WCC 29612003 CA

Case Name:	Aldi v. Carr, McClellan, etc.		06/21/2006
Summary:	*fn2 Because of the important legal issue presented as to the meaning and application of Senate Bill (SB) 899 (Stats. )*fn3 rating schedule applies, unless one of the exceptions delineated in the third sentence of section 4660(d) is present. "Three Interpretations of Subdivision (d) of Labor Code Section 4660 "There are three possible interpretations of the second and third sentences in subdivision (d). Since the Administrative Director did not adopt the revised rating schedule until January 1, 2005, the third sentence is moot. "We do not address at this time when and how the exceptions in the third sentence of section 4660(d) apply.
Note:	Failure by the Division of Workers' Compensation to adopt a new permanent disability rating schedule (PDRS) on or before 1/1/05, as mandated by Labor Code section 4660(e), did not otherwise alter its applicability to injuries that occurred earlier than 1/1/05.
Citation:	70 CCC 783
WCC Citation:	WCC 31672006 CA

Case Name:	Alejandre v. Valleycrest Companies		09/29/2008
Summary:	Filed 9/29/08 Alejandre v. Valleycrest Companies CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8. 1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8. 1115(b). IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR CATALINA ALEJANDRE et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. VALLEYCREST COMPANIES, Defendant and Respondent. In January 2002, defendant Valleycrest Companies (Valleycrest) took its pickup truck to a dealer because the air bag light was flashing. *fn1 About a year after these events, in March 2003, Valleycrest hired Ignacio Alejandre, Sr. In September 2004, Alejandre was driving the Valleycrest truck to a work site with other employees when a vehicle from the opposite direction crossed the center line and collided head-on with the truck.
Note:	[Unpublished] An employee's dependents may not maintain a civil action for damages where, as here, the employee is injured by the employer's deliberate failure to assure that workplace equipment is safe, and conceals the lack of safety features on that equipment.
Citation:	A120256
WCC Citation:	WCC 34312008 CA

Case Name:	Algara v. Automobile Club of Southern California		08/21/2012
Summary:	ALGARA v. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JULIA ALGARA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Defendant and Respondent. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION RAMIREZ, P. J. Julia Algara, plaintiff, was terminated from her employment at Automobile Club of Southern California (Automobile Club), after multiple extensions of her medical leave of absence. Plaintiff contacted the Palm Springs office of Automobile Club and was informed that there were openings, but that a hiring freeze was in effect. On May 3, 2011, the motion was granted by the superior court, and judgment in favor of Automobile Club was entered accordingly. She urges that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court's finding that Automobile Club terminated plaintiff's employment for a non-discriminatory reason, because Automobile Club had not presented uncontroverted evidence of a "need" to fill plaintiff's position.
Note:	An office worker who was unable to return to work after more than six months of medical leave could not assert a viable disability discrimination claim against her employer based on its decision to terminate her and hire someone else to fill her position, which it had held open for 24 weeks.
Citation:	E054171
WCC Citation:	WCC 39242012 CA

Case Name:	Alhambra Comm. Hospital v. WCAB		06/21/1979
Summary:	Petitioner Alhambra Community Hospital (Alhambra Hospital), a non-profit hospital corporation, provided medical care on a 'self-procured' basis totalling $5,581. 73 in billing to Avelar for the alleged industrial condition. n7 A conference was then held, but Alhambra Hospital could not resolve its differences with Avelar and Elmore. Thus, Avelar and Elmore proposed to 'settle around' Alhambra Hospital; thereby leaving Alhambra Hospital to litigate its lien. Alhambra Hospital sought reconsideration by the WCAB on the approval of the settlement without provision being made for its lien. Since Alhambra Hospital's lien does not come within section 4903. 1, the appeals board has no authority to force Alhambra Hospital to take a reduction on its lien.
Note:	Disputed claim can be settled without satisfaction of any outstanding liens or lien claimant's consent.
Citation:	44 CCC 611
WCC Citation:	WCC 25271979 CA

Case Name:	Ali v. USA. Cab Ltd.		07/24/2009
Summary:	Ali also submitted a copy of the training manual USA Cab provided its lessees. Before entering into a lease with USA Cab, Ali leased a taxi from Ivory Cab. Ali also testified he kept no financial records and could not ascertain how much he earned while driving the USA Cab taxi. In July, without leave of court, Ali filed declarations by Hristov and two additional drivers for USA Cab, which set forth individualized claims. After his relationship with USA Cab ended in 2007, Hristov worked for two other cab companies as an independent contractor and without any employee benefits.
Note:	The declarations of 36 putative class members sufficiently shows that they plaintiffs failed to meet their burden as to the predominance of common issues.
Citation:	D052127
WCC Citation:	WCC 35472009 CA