Case Name:	County of Ventura v. WCAB		10/04/1993
Summary:	County of Ventura, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California, Evangelina Anaya, et al. , Respondents. County asserts that the WCAB should have ordered Dr. Sanchez to reimburse County for at least 75 percent and possibly 100 percent of the temporary disability indemnity and past medical treatment costs for which County paid. n2 The WCAB case number for the application against County is VEN 78908. n4 As previously noted, WCAB case No. VEN 78908 is the case against County. n5 As previously noted, WCAB case No. VEN 78908 is the case against County.
Note:	Right to arbitration on 'contribution' issues is waived if not timely raised.
Citation:	58 CCC 649
WCC Citation:	WCC 26251993 CA

Case Name:	Courtney v. City of Redondo Beach		02/27/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT TERI COURTNEY et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, Defendant and Respondent. Teri Courtney and Lillian Ballinger were long-term employees who worked for the City of Redondo Beach in its police department as jailers. In accordance with Dr. Berman's conclusions, the City asked Courtney to return to work on March 4, 2003. In December 2004, Courtney, Ballinger, Jo Ellen Latham (an identification technician for the police department), and Elizabeth Blatt filed this lawsuit against the City of Redondo Beach, alleging numerous violations of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The City of Redondo Beach is to recover its costs on appeal.
Note:	[Unpublished] The City did not violate its legal duty to reassign Plaintiffs to another equivalent job for which they were qualified because the evidence showed no such positions were available when they were terminated.
Citation:	B192927
WCC Citation:	WCC 33222008 CA

Case Name:	Cox v. San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Dept.		03/28/2012
Summary:	EDWARD COX, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Edward Cox appeals a summary judgment granted in favor of defendant San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Department (Department). But in his prior deposition, Cox was asked, "Do you believe that your cerebral palsy restricts you from doing things?"That memorandum reflects that Thompson told Cox that he was not performing well and he asked Cox "if there was anything [he] could do to help [Cox] improve. "Cox responded, "No. " Cox claimed Moore unfairly criticized him for making an incorrect time entry on a log.
Note:	A sheriff's deputy terminated during his new-hire probationary period failed to prove his claim of disability discrimination based upon his alleged cerebral palsy.
Citation:	B231260
WCC Citation:	WCC 38792012 CA

Case Name:	Cranford v. City of Huntington Beach		03/02/2012
Summary:	NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION O'LEARY, P. J. Catherine Denise Cranford appeals from the judgment in her action against her former employer, the City of Huntington Beach (the City). Herrera retaliated against Cranford by repeatedly complaining to Miller about Cranford's job performance and constantly confronting Cranford about job-related matters. When Cranford tried to "chastise the officer for violating the prisoner's right of privacy[,]" the officer looked at Cranford "dismissively . Cranford claimed Herrera made a "`preemptive strike'" by telling Miller she was considering filing a complaint against Cranford, which coerced Cranford into not filing a formal complaint against Herrera. There is no evidence the City Attorney had any knowledge of the animosity between Cranford and Herrera, or of any complaints Cranford made to Miller.
Note:	A municipal employer's release of medical information from an employee's workers' compensation claim file did not constitute an adverse employment action for purposes of the state Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Citation:	G043791
WCC Citation:	WCC 38672012 CA

Case Name:	Crawford v. WCAB		06/13/1989
Summary:	Dr. Crawford then petitioned this court for a writ of prohibition restraining further proceedings by the WCAB. 1 An additional 13 counts charge Dr. Crawford with deceit in failing to identify the persons who prepared medical reports and in willfully misrepresenting to the WCAB that Dr. Crawford alone took medical histories and prepared the reports. Another count (35) charges that Dr. Crawford filed false medical reports and liens in two other workers' compensation [213 Cal. App. 3d 163] cases (Robert J. Kelley v. Panama Moving and Storage, WCAB No. 85 LA 525604, and Robert J. Kelley v. Goldrich & Kest Management, WCAB Nos. Based on the accusation and accompanying exhibits, the WCAB ordered that Dr. Crawford appear before a WCAB commissioner at a certain time and place and show cause, if any, why he should not be held in contempt pursuant to Labor Code section 134. The WCAB states: 'It is a policy of the [WCAB] to conduct an investigation of all charges of impropriety against persons involved in [WCAB] proceedings before considering whether an order to show cause regarding contempt should issue.
Note:	WCAB has wide latitude in enforcement of contempt findings.
Citation:	213 Cal.App.3d 156, 54 CCC 198
WCC Citation:	WCC 25651989 CA

Case Name:	Creative Environments of Hollywood v. USF Ins. Co.		08/20/2012
Summary:	CREATIVE ENVIRONMENTS OF HOLLYWOOD v. USF INS. CO. CREATIVE ENVIRONMENTS OF HOLLYWOOD et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. USF INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiffs and appellants Creative Environments of Hollywood and 201 Westmoreland Associates, Ltd. (collectively Contractor), appeals from summary judgments in favor of defendants and respondents USF Insurance Company (Insurer) and its agent Burns & Wilcox, Ltd. (Agent). I dissent as to the summary judgment in favor of USF Insurance Company (USF). Thus, as interpreted by USF, the policy, having a total cost of over $5,000, is almost illusory.
Note:	An insurance carrier had no duty to defend its client from a claim by an injured plumbing subcontractor for maintaining an unsafe work environment since the plain language of its policy specifically excluded coverage for bodily injury to such workers arising out of their employment.
Citation:	B232436
WCC Citation:	WCC 39222012 CA

Case Name:	Criswell v. WCAB		02/20/2009
Summary:	At a July 16, 2008, hearing in which Criswell testified, the WCJ immediately ruled Criswell was entitled to left ankle surgery along with the left knee surgery as described by Dr. Pistel at the County's expense. The WCAB granted the County's petition for reconsideration and in a split decision, the majority disagreed with the WCJ and concluded Criswell failed to meet her burden of proving industrial causation with reasonably probability. Accordingly, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's order and concluded Criswell was not entitled to the left ankle surgery described by Dr. Pistel at defendant's expense. Criswell contends the WCAB majority failed to consider Dr. Pistel's medical opinion that the left ankle surgery would aid her recovery from the industrially related knee surgery in denying the concurrent ankle surgery. While we agree with Criswell that the WCAB provided little reasoning related to this argument, the majority's decision is supported by the medical evidence.
Note:	WCAB's decision not to order surgery supported by substantial evidence and applicant's effective waiver of the issue in adopting a stipulated award.
Citation:	F056510
WCC Citation:	WCC 34942009 CA

Case Name:	Crown Appliance vs. WCAB (Wong)		02/05/2004
Summary:	Crown Appliance (Crown) petitions for a writ of review to determine the lawfulness of the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) concluding that Crown discriminated against its employee Morton Wong for filing a workers' compensation claim. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORIES Wong sustained an industrial injury to his left elbow and back in August 2000 while employed as a delivery driver and appliance installer for Crown in Modesto, California. The parties settled Wong's underlying disability claim but continued to dispute whether Crown discriminated against Wong under section 132a. At a March 2003 WCAB hearing, Wong testified that he had a very good relationship with the owner of Crown, Mary Sanchez, before his injury. Mathew Burns worked at Crown and described the rapport between Wong and Sanchez before Wong's injury as "friendly. "
Note:	Substantial evidence supporting finding of discrimination will not be reversed on appeal; attorney fees for meritless appeal proper.
Citation:	115 Cal.App.4th 620
WCC Citation:	WCC 29692004 CA

Case Name:	Crumlish v. the Board of Administration of the San Diego City Employees		03/15/2012
Summary:	Deborah Crumlish v. the Board of Administration of the San Diego City Employees, No. D058955 (Cal. App. Dist. 4 03/15/2012) COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA D058955 March 15, 2012 DEBORAH CRUMLISH, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE SAN DIEGO CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 1995 the City of San Diego (the City) Fire Department hired Deborah Crumlish as a 911 dispatcher. In 2004 Crumlish had applied to the San Diego City Employees' Retirement System (SDCERS) for an industrial disability pension. The officer then applied to the San Diego City Retirement Board of Administration (retirement board) for industrial disability retirement. Crumlish cites Roccaforte v. City of San Diego (1979) 89 Cal. App. 3d 877, 884, in which this court referred to SDCERS as an "arm of the City. "
Note:	A public employer's pension system is not collaterally estopped from denying an employee an industrial disability pension after the employer has agreed a certain injury was work-related for purposes of workers' compensation benefits.
Citation:	D058955
WCC Citation:	WCC 38742012 CA

Case Name:	Cruz v. Mercedes-Benz of San Francisco		09/05/2007
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) Case No. SFO 0501425 PAUL CRUZ, Applicant, vs. MERCEDES-BENZ OF SAN FRANCISCO, and AUTO DEALERS COMPENSATION OF CALIFORNIA, administered by INTERCARE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s). Pursuant to section 4656(c)(1), defendant stopped paying temporary disability indemnity on January 17, 2007, because two years had passed since payment commenced. Labor Code !ý requires liberal construction with the purpose of extending benefits for the protection of persons injured in the course of their employment. "Defendant petitioned for reconsideration, contending that the WCJ erred in awarding additional temporary disability indemnity. If the statute is unfair, it is the job of the legislature to correct it, not the WCAB. "
Note:	'Amputations,' as used in Labor Code section 4656(c)(2)(C) means the severance or removal of a limb, part of a limb, or other body appendage, including both traumatic loss in an industrial injury and surgical removal during treatment of an industrial injury.
Citation:	72 CCC 1281
WCC Citation:	WCC 32512007 CA