Case Name:	Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. IAC		08/30/1951
Summary:	BETHLEHEM PACIFIC COAST STEEL CORP. (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION et al. , Respondents. In proceedings several years later he was given an award based on a rating of 10 1/4 per cent permanent disability. The second hearing was before a different referee and the rating was made by a different rating specialist. Chipman was injured while he and a fellow employee were unloading from a gondola car steel girders and trusses, and some miscellaneous iron. A girder, weighing about 1,875 pounds, which was being handled by a crane, caught on the edge of the car.
Note:	In reviewing award of IAC, questions not raised on application for rehearing won't be considered.
Citation:	106 Cal.App.2d 373, 16 CCC 210
WCC Citation:	WCC 26571951 CA

Case Name:	Betson v. Rite Aid Corp		11/27/2012
Summary:	BETSON v. RITE AID CORPORATION DOREEN BETSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RITE AID CORPORATION, Defendant and Respondent. The jury found that Rite Aid did not inform anyone other than Betson that she had committed fraud, had stolen from Rite Aid, or had engaged in theft. She alleged that Rite Aid "falsely informed Betson that she was being terminated for stealing, knew that Betson would be forced to inform others of why Rite Aid claimed that she had been fired and in fact Betson told others what Rite Aid said to her. Betson claims she satisfied this requirement through the testimony of John Acosta, a Rite Aid district manager, in another case, Martinez v. Rite Aid (LASC Case No. BC401746). Rite Aid answered the first amended complaint as "Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba `Rite Aid' (erroneously sued herein as `Rite Aid Corporation') .
Note:	The 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that evidence of a supervisor's hostile treatment of an injured retail worker precluded summary judgment on the worker's claims of discrimination and retaliation for her disability and for taking medical leave.
Citation:	B235747
WCC Citation:	WCC 39522012 CA

Case Name:	Betsworth vs. WCAB		06/30/1994
Summary:	At this point (though the record is not exactly clear) Betsworth became upset and addressed Referee Flynn as "Madam Referee. "The applicant's attorney would later testify that Betsworth then said she "basically could not get a fair hearing on [the venue] issue. (In various declarations prior to the later contempt hearing, Betsworth denied ever using the words "fair hearing. ")As the attorneys were heading out the doorway Betsworth said, "this [is] another case that should be referred to the L. A. Referee Flynn then filed her formal accusation of contempt against Betsworth, but only after Betsworth had filed a petition requesting Referee Flynn's removal.
Note:	Discussion of contempt before WCJ.
Citation:	26 Cal.App.4th 586
WCC Citation:	WCC 29301994 CA

Case Name:	Beverly Hills Multispecialty Med. Grp. v. WCAB		07/07/1994
Summary:	BEVERLY HILLS MULTISPECIALTY GROUP, INC. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, INTERNATIONAL RECTIFIER et al. , Respondents. [26 Cal. App. 4th 792] OPINION CROSKEY, J. Petitioner, Beverly Hills Multispecialty Group, Inc. (BHMG), sought writs of review in 10 cases in which respondent Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) affirmed orders denying BHMG's lien claims for medical treatment and medical-legal costs. Some of Mr. Jordan's testimony, while Mr. Lispi was outside the hearing room, concerned treatment that Mr. Jordan obtained at BHMG. After Mr. Lispi was allowed to return to the hearing room, he made two objections, both of which were sustained. He stated that BHMG's bills in the 10 cases totalled $157,906. 50 and that the total defense cost was $62,047. 49.
Note:	Lien claimants entitled to due process in work comp proceedings; failure to serve defense med. reports/notice of fraud allegations denies fair trial, is reversible per se.
Citation:	26 Cal.App.4th 789, 59 CCC 461
WCC Citation:	WCC 3961994 CA

Case Name:	Beverly Hilton Hotel, Hilton Hotels Corp. v. WCAB (Boganim)		08/26/2009
Summary:	Filed 8/26/09 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE BEVERLY HILTON HOTEL, HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and SAMSON BOGANIM, Respondents. A trial de novo was held at the local appeals board, and the Determination of the Rehabilitation Unit was upheld. After granting reconsideration, the Board, on October 7, 2008, affirmed the January 31, 2008, Findings and Award of the WCJ. is a statutory system enacted pursuant to a constitutional grant of power to the Legislature to establish a workers' compensation system. The system evolved from a voluntary program to one in which the employer had a statutory obligation to provide benefits to qualified workers.
Note:	Because the WCAB's decision was not a final determination of claimant's right to vocational rehabilitation benefits and because section 139.5 has been repealed, he is not entitled to vocational rehabilitation benefits.
Citation:	B212205
WCC Citation:	WCC 35572009 CA

Case Name:	Bhandari v. 7-Eleven		01/09/2018
Summary:	Procedural History   Bhandari’s parents, plaintiffs and appellants Rajendra Bhandari and Deu Bhandari (plaintiffs), acting on behalf of Bhandari’s estate, sued defendants for negligence in October 2012. In a first amended complaint, plaintiffs allege D&D knew Bhandari was the principal witness in the criminal case against Frazier and that Bhandari was to testify against Frazier on the day he was killed. Bhandari also told Davinder he did not feel well and asked to go home, at which point Davinder “relieved Bhandari from his shift. ” Davinder said neither Bhandari nor anyone else ever told him Bhandari felt threatened or fearful for his safety. Davinder said he did not know what case Bhandari was talking about, nor did he know Bhandari had been in court to testify. He said Bhandari did not ask to go home; Bhandari left because he had finished the project he came in to complete.
Note:	The owners of a 7-Eleven could not have foreseen their employee getting shot dead outside the store on the day he was scheduled to testify against an accused robber
Citation:	B275219
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VC062208

Case Name:	Bi-Coastal Payroll Services, Inc. v. CIGA		05/29/2009
Summary:	Plaintiffs believed the reserves set by CIGA were disproportionately high in relation to the age of the individual claims, representing an aggressive reserving policy on the part of CIGA. Plaintiffs also learned that CIGA set substantial reserves to cover incurred but not yet reported losses (IBNR), even though most of the claims being administered by CIGA were several years old. During the same period, CIGA commenced sending demand letters to the various payroll companies seeking direct reimbursement for benefits paid under the Legion policies. Despite CIGA's demand for reimbursement for benefits paid under the Legion policies, CIGA refused to provide meaningful access to the claims files. The named plaintiffs are: Bi-Coastal Payroll Services, Inc. ; Curiosity Payroll Services, Inc. ; Epicurean Services, Inc. ; Emerald Payroll Services, Inc. ; Film Payment Services, Inc. ; FPS Payroll Services, Inc. ; FSI Processing, Inc. ; Maize-El Services, Inc. ; Movie Payroll, Inc. ; Power Payroll, Inc. ; Producer Payroll, Inc. ; Production Processing, Inc. ; Quantos Payroll Service, Inc. ; Radar Payroll Services, Inc. ; Staff Payroll Services, Inc. ; Transcontinental Payroll, Inc. , d. b. a. West Coast Extras, Inc. ; West Coast Extras, Inc. ; X Rhode, Inc. ; Media Services.
Note:	Plaintiffs' duty to file notice of appeal arose from the service of notice of entry of judgment, not the service of the trial court's earlier minute order and that their appeal is therefore timely.
Citation:	B205969
WCC Citation:	WCC 35282009 CA

Case Name:	Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. WCAB and Paul Hunt		10/04/2010
Summary:	BIGGE CRANE & RIGGING CO. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND PAUL HUNT, Respondents. Introduction Respondent Paul Hunt was injured while assisting with the dismantling of a truck crane used during a shutdown operation at a refinery. In January 2002, he was hired by Bigge Crane to operate a 90-ton, Peck & Hiller truck crane at the Chevron refinery job site. In the meantime, Embry told the operator of another crane (an 80-ton truck crane) and Hunt, who was working as the oiler, to go and assist Mom. As Hunt points out, Bigge Crane was cited for violating several safety orders, including orders requiring employee training and the securing or blocking of crane booms.
Note:	Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. WCAB, A127136, (10/04/2010): An employer is not liable for a benefits increase under a
Citation:	A127136
WCC Citation:	WCC 36752010 CA

Case Name:	Biggers v. WCAB		01/21/1999
Summary:	Biggers contends that as a courtroom bailiff, her functions clearly came within the scope of active law enforcement, entitling her to those benefits. At the hearing, Biggers testified she worked as a deputy sheriff; her assignment was courtroom bailiff. The workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found Biggers was not an employee entitled to the benefits of Labor Code section 4850. At the hearing Biggers testified she was hired in 1989; she had been a bailiff for seven years. Based on this additional evidence, the WCJ found Biggers was entitled to benefits under Labor Code section 4850.
Note:	Courtroom bailiff's duties came within scope of active law enforcement.
Citation:	69 Cal.App.4th 431, 64 CCC 19
WCC Citation:	WCC 26871999 CA

Case Name:	Biloy v. WCAB (C.A. Rocha & Sons)		01/03/1975
Summary:	EMEGDIO BILOY, Petitioner v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; C. A. ROCHA & SONS; and PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondents. OPINION: Emegdio Biloy sustained an injury to his back in the scope of his employment as a cook, on April 9, 1969. After a hearing on petitioner's application the referee found that petitioner's temporary disability had lasted until June 26, 1972. The referee noted that it was 'difficult to determine exactly when applicant's condition became permanent, stationary, and ratable. The report stated that Mr. Biloy would be able to return to work on November 1, 1969.
Note:	Evidence in carrier's possession cannot be 'new' evidence absent good showing that ev. was 'undiscoverable'.
Citation:	40 CCC 35
WCC Citation:	WCC 27311975 CA