Case Name:	Baxter v. Riverside Community College District		04/03/2012
Summary:	BAXTER v. RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT MARY BAXTER, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, Defendant and Appellant. INTRODUCTION Defendant Riverside Community College District (RCCD) appeals from judgment following the trial court's granting of the petition for writ of mandate filed by plaintiff Mary Baxter seeking reinstatement to her teaching position with RCCD. Baxter contends she believed she was a permanent employee with a right to return within 39 months. Baxter filed a petition for writ of mandate on June 9, 2008, requesting reinstatement and back pay to February 21, 2006. Where good cause exists, the District may request that an employee undergo a fitness-for-duty examination by a licensed physician, at District expense.
Note:	A disabled college professor was not entitled to reinstatement after taking disability leave because she did not provide adequate notice of her ability to return to work.
Citation:	E052406
WCC Citation:	WCC 38822012 CA

Case Name:	Bazzini v. Technicolor, Inc.		01/21/2010
Summary:	INTRODUCTION In this lawsuit, plaintiff and appellant Terry Bazzini and his wife, plaintiff and appellant Phyllis Bazzini, sued Mr. Bazzini's ex- employer, defendant and respondent Technicolor, Inc. , for personal injuries. Technicolor did not provide Mr. Bazzini with protective devises that would have prevented the chemicals from touching Mr. Bazzini's skin and Technicolor did not refer Mr. Bazzini to a physician. Additionally, plaintiffs allege Ms. Bazzini developed severe illnesses and injuries, including urinary infections and red spots on her bladder wall through secondary exposure to the chemicals Mr. Bazzini brought home on his body and clothes. With regard to Mr. Bazzini, Technicolor argued any redress was limited to workers' compensation as it did not fraudulently conceal from Mr. Bazzini any work-related injury or illness. Since the trial court properly granted summary judgment to Technicolor with regard to Mr. Bazzini, it also properly granted summary judgment with regard to Ms. Bazzini.
Note:	Workers' compensation is the only redress for an employee who contracted cancer from chemical exposure at work because he submitted no proof that his employer concealed the danger and caused an aggravation of his injury.
Citation:	B205947
WCC Citation:	WCC 35932010 CA

Case Name:	Beaida v. WCAB		06/17/1968
Summary:	JOSEPH BEAIDA, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, PLACER COUNTY HOSPITAL et al. , Respondents. In summary, WCAB takes the position that Dr. Cummings' September 26 letter was not entitled to recognition as a pleading or petition, since the claimant still had an attorney of record; that the attorney, not the doctor, was the claimant's spokesman in the WCAB proceedings. It vests WCAB with jurisdiction to make the award if the injured employee institutes proceedings within five years of the injury date. A broader proceeding is available under sections 5803 and 5804, which authorize WCAB to amend an award upon a good cause where the disability has recurred or increased. The response of WCAB and the oral argument in this court discussed section 5803 as well.
Note:	Doctor's letter to WCAB asking for adjustment in disability rating was valid petition for review, timely filed.
Citation:	263 Cal.App.2d 204, 33 CCC 345
WCC Citation:	WCC 26421968 CA

Case Name:	Becerra v. Eastside Reservior Proj., et. al.		07/17/1997
Summary:	Ramon Becerra, Applicant v. Eastside Reservoir Project/Advanco Constructors, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, Defendants. WCAB No. AHM 51304 CCC 937 July 17, 1997 The Order Granting Reconsideration is vacated and defendant's petition for reconsideration is dismissed. When their petition for dismissal was not granted, defendants filed a Petition for Reconsideration. We have completed our study and, as explained below, we will vacate the order granting reconsideration, grant removal, and dismiss the Application. Defendants filed a petition for reconsideration arguing that the workers' compensation referee (WCR) erred in refusing to grant their petition for dismissal of the Application.
Note:	Proper procedure to follow involving 3201.5 cases.
Citation:	62 CCC 937
WCC Citation:	WCC 3941997 CA

Case Name:	Bed, Bath & Beyond v. WCAB		12/13/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT BED, BATH & BEYOND, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and KIM COSTA, Respondents. Bed, Bath & Beyond petitions for review of the WCAB's decision, contending that the WCJ should have applied the 2005 permanent disability rating schedule. Bed, Bath & Beyond petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration of the permanent disability award, arguing that the WCJ should have applied the 2005 permanent disability rating schedule to calculate Costa's permanent disability, pursuant to section 4660, subdivision (d). Standard of Review The appellate courts are authorized to review WCAB decisions and to issue a writ of review pursuant to section 5950. The WCAB panel relied on the en banc decision in Pendergrass I, supra, 72 Cal. Comp. Cases at page 98, where the WCAB stated that "for purposes of section 4660 .
Note:	[Unpublished] An employer is not required to provide a notice of permanent disability benefits until the last temporary disability payment is made or has become due.
Citation:	H031400
WCC Citation:	WCC 32882007 CA

Case Name:	Bekins Moving & Storage Company v. WCAB		11/23/1982
Summary:	BEKINS MOVING & STORAGE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and GEORGE HANSEN, Respondents. Applicant George Hansen injured his back on January 20, 1975, while employed by Bekins Moving & Storage Company (hereafter Bekins) as a furniture mover. Before the hearing, Hansen returned to work with Bekins, but he left in 1976 to form his own furniture moving business in Santa Cruz, California. Bekins concluded upon review of the reports and analysis that Mr. Hansen was not in need of rehabilitation. The Bureau disagreed and ordered Bekins to refer Mr. Hansen to a qualified rehabilitation specialist and to pay the applicant temporary disability benefits while rehabilitation was underway.
Note:	There is a five year statute of limitations for requests for rehabilitation.
Citation:	137 Cal.App.3d 665, 47 CCC 1260
WCC Citation:	WCC 25031982 CA

Case Name:	Bell v. Samaritan Medical Clinic, Inc.		07/26/1976
Summary:	BELL as Administrative Director, etc. , et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. SAMARITAN MEDICAL CLINIC, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Appellants (Opinion by Kane, J. , with Taylor, P. J. , and Rouse, J. , concurring. )As we shall explain, the answer to this inquiry is clearly "no. " We accordingly affirm the order of the trial court. Bell, as the Administrative Director of the Division of Industrial Accidents ("Director"), and the Workers' Compensation [60 Cal. App. 3d 488] Appeals Board ("Board") filed the present action to enjoin fn. Thus, under section 5307. 1, the Director is authorized -- after public hearings -- to adopt an official minimum medical fee schedule. We see no distinction in substance between the physician's rendition of treatment and medical reports and the rendition of legal services by the claimants' attorney.
Note:	Medical provider may not charge injured worker for any amount not covered by comp.
Citation:	60 CA 3d 486; 41 CCC 415
WCC Citation:	WCC 30251976 CA

Case Name:	Bell v. WCAB		03/10/1987
Summary:	Rosemary Bell, Applicant, and Blue Cross of California, Petitioner in Intervention v. Workers Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California and County of Los Angeles, Respondents On June 1, 1977, Rosemary Bell filed an application for workers' compensation benefits. Blue Cross paid for Bell's psychiatric treatment. On 6/21/78 a C&R was approved but Blue Cross had not filed its lien. Blue Cross filed its lien 10/16/78, but didn't file a Declaration of Readiness until 9/24/85. Blue Cross lost on Reconsideration, and its Petition for Writ of Review was denied.
Note:	Motion to set aside C&R by lien claimant barred by laches because claimant waited 7 years.
Citation:	52 CCC 72 (Writ Denied)
WCC Citation:	WCC 28781987 CA

Case Name:	Bell vs. Agee Construction		12/29/2004
Summary:	COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA D043626 December 29, 2004 DOUGLAS BELL, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. GREG AGEE CONSTRUCTION, INC. CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION Douglas Bell appeals from a summary judgment in favor of general contractor Greg Agee Construction, Inc. and its principal Greg Agee (collectively Agee) on Bell's complaint for personal injuries he sustained after a wall fell on him at his workplace. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In April 2002, Bell, an employee of Kincaid Construction Co. (Kincaid), was working at a construction site when a gust of wind caused a framed wall to fall on him, injuring his back. Bell further alleged Agee should have recognized that the work of framing was likely to create a special risk of bodily harm to others unless special precautions were taken. Bell's Contentions In a series of arguments based on Privette's underlying policies and objectives, Bell contends Privette should not bar his claims against Agee.
Note:	Subcontractor's failure to maintain WC does not create liability for general contractor.
Citation:	125 Cal. App. 4th 453
WCC Citation:	WCC 30702004 CA

Case Name:	Bell-Sparrow v. Farmers Insurance Company		11/13/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO ARLENE BELL-SPARROW, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. Ct. No. HG08373500) Arlene Bell-Sparrow (plaintiff) appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Farmers Insurance Company (defendant or Farmers)*fn1 in this employment discrimination/wrongful termination action. In her briefing on appeal, plaintiff appears to be arguing that defendant used its "employment connection" with Insurance Recruitment Specialists to get her "black listed" in the insurance industry. Defendant's true name apparently is "Farmers Insurance Exchange. "However, for purposes of this lawsuit, its name is set forth as "Farmers Insurance Company. "
Note:	[Unpublished] Only if a plaintiff produces sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case does the burden shift to the employer to present evidence showing it had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the employment action, which plaintiff here failed to do.
Citation:	A124481
WCC Citation:	WCC 35772009 CA