Case Name:	Janzen v. WCAB		12/30/1997
Summary:	STEPHANIE JANZEN et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CLAYTON CURTIS et al. , Respondents. [61 Cal. App. 4th 112] OPINION PUGLIA, P. J. - Petitioner, Stephanie Janzen, seeks review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) dismissing her application for death benefits. Petitioner's father, Stanley Janzen (the deceased), a California resident, was killed in an airplane crash while working in Wyoming as a pilot for a Wyoming employer. 1 Curtis made a 'special appearance' in the workers' compensation proceeding, objecting to subject matter [61 Cal. App. 4th 113] jurisdiction. The State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) was later added as a defendant and Marvin Janzen was dropped.
Note:	Employment contract was entered into in CA; thus Sec. 5305 confers subject matter jurisdiction over dispute
Citation:	61 Cal.App.4th 109, 63 CCC 1
WCC Citation:	WCC 24811997 CA

Case Name:	Jeewarat v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.		09/03/2009
Summary:	FACTS Marc Brandon worked for Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. (Warner) as Vice-President of Anti-Piracy Internet Operations. The accident occurred at approximately 4:35 p. m. One or both cars struck and injured pedestrians Chuenchomporn Jeewarat, Tipphawan Tantisriyanurak and Kanhathai Vutthicharoen. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On February 2, 2007, Jeewarat and Tantisriyanurak filed a personal injury action against Brandon and Southard. On July 5, 2007, Jeewarat and Tantisriyanurak filed an amendment to the complaint substituting Warner as a Doe defendant. Warner asserted that even if the special errand doctrine applied, any special errand ended when Brandon drove his regular commute route home.
Note:	An employee's attendance at an out-of-town business conference may be considered a special errand under the special errand doctrine and the errand is not concluded simply because the employee drives his regular commute route, but rather, the errand is concluded when the employee returns home or deviates from the errand for personal reasons.
Citation:	B212323
WCC Citation:	WCC 35592009 CA

Case Name:	Jefferson v. CA Dept. of Youth Authority		07/01/2002
Summary:	MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The California Department of Youth Authority (the Youth Authority) employed Mary Jefferson from September 1992 to February 1994 to work part-time as a teacher's assistant in the high school classroom of Larry Berg. Eventually, the Youth Authority reassigned Jefferson to a different classroom, but at about the same time, her doctor recommended she stop working due to work-related stress. On July 9, 1996, Jefferson settled her workers' compensation claim against the Youth Authority using the mandatory form adopted by the workers' compensation appeals board (WCAB) for compromise and release of claims. Jefferson filed this civil action on August 23, 1996, against the Youth Authority and Larry Berg.
Note:	C&R that releases all claims sufficient to defeat FEHA claim arising from same facts.
Citation:	28 Cal.4th 299; 67 CCC 727
WCC Citation:	WCC 28662002 CA

Case Name:	Jefferson v. CA Youth Authority		03/26/2001
Summary:	MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Introduction Plaintiff Mary J. Jefferson appeals judgment entered in favor of defendants California Department of Youth Authority (CYA) and Larry Berg (defendants) following the trial court's ruling granting defendants' motion for summary judgment. Jefferson v. California Dept. of Youth Authority (2001) , Cal. App. 4th [No. E026915. MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents.
Note:	A general release in a C&R is effective against ALL other claims.
Citation:	87 Cal.App.4th 1357, 66 CCC 343
WCC Citation:	WCC 4232001 CA

Case Name:	Jeffrey Tverberg v. Fillner Construction (1st DCA opinion)		12/05/2008
Summary:	Fillner contracted with Lane Supply, which in turn hired Perry Construction, Inc. (Perry), to install a canopy at the project site. On May 2, 2006, Jeffrey Tverberg fell into a hole at the project site, resulting in both physical and emotional injuries. *fn1 Jeffrey Tverberg alleged causes of action for negligence and premises liability; Catherine Tverberg pled a cause of action for loss of consortium. Finding that Fillner had established a complete defense to the Tverbergs' action, the trial court entered judgment for Fillner in November 2007. Furthermore, those assertions are supported by a declaration from a Fillner employee made under penalty of perjury, by a declaration from Jeffrey Tverberg made under penalty of perjury and by the deposition testimony of Jeffrey Tverberg himself.
Note:	An injured independent contractor is not barred from filing a personal injury action against a general contractor, despite a contrary ruling by another appellate court.
Citation:	A120050
WCC Citation:	WCC 34662008 CA

Case Name:	Jeffrey v. Temple City Unified School District		02/11/2013
Summary:	JEFFREY v. TEMPLE CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT RANDOLPH JEFFREY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TEMPLE CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of a public school district, in a lawsuit alleging that the district violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). FACTS Plaintiff's Employment and Injuries Randolph Jeffrey was hired as a part-time custodian in December 2005 by the Temple City Unified School District (TCUSD) to perform light maintenance and repairs, and to direct traffic. TCUSD contacted Jeffrey regularly regarding his medical status until he told the district to "stop harassing me while I'm convalescing. "Jeffrey's Ability to Do His Job The school district contends that Jeffrey cannot prevail on his discrimination claim because he was not "qualified to do his job. "
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that an injured school custodian's claims of disability discrimination failed as a matter of law.
Citation:	B241688
WCC Citation:	WCC 39852013 CA

Case Name:	Jenkins v. WCAB		05/29/1975
Summary:	ELDA E. JENKINS, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Taylor, P. J. , with Kane and Rouse, JJ. , concurring. )COUNSEL Maurice S. Marcus and Richard A. Hellesto for Petitioner. T. Groezinger, James J. Vonk, George S. Bjornsen and Robert A. The policy expressed in Labor Code section 3202 applies equally to 'the courts' and to the board (Gross v. Workmen's Comp. The policy seems frequently overlooked by the board (Gross, supra, p. 403).
Note:	Commutation of death benefit appropriate where beneficiary terminally ill.
Citation:	48 Cal.App.3d 570, 40 CCC 329
WCC Citation:	WCC 24241975 CA

Case Name:	Jensen vs. Amgen		02/03/2003
Summary:	DARCY M. JENSEN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. AMGEN, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff and appellant Darcy M. Jensen is employed by defendant and respondent Amgen, Inc. as a module team coordinator. Amgen transferred Jensen out of buildings 5 and 15 shortly after the safety report was filed. Jensen voluntarily dismissed her claim for unfair business practices and appealed the judgment subsequently entered in favor of Amgen. Nor did Jensen present evidence of the second condition necessary for the fraudulent concealment exception, namely, that Amgen concealed the connection between her symptoms and her employment.
Note:	Work comp is exclusive remedy for injuries from mold in the workplace absent fraudulent concealment.
Citation:	105 Cal.App.4th 1322
WCC Citation:	WCC 29122003 CA

Case Name:	Jensen vs. WCAB		07/19/1985
Summary:	OTTO JENSEN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and GILLIG CORPORATION, Respondents. Carl J. Weber and Hanna, Brophy, MacLean, McAleer & Jensen for Respondents. [170 Cal. App. 3d 246] OPINION KLINE, P. J. Petitioner Otto Jensen seeks review of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) opinion and order denying reconsideration. Petitioner Jensen was employed as a sheet metal welder by respondent Gillig Corporation and was injured in a fall in the course of his employment. On December 13, petitioner filed a petition for imposition of a 10 percent penalty for respondent's failure to pay temporary disability compensation.
Note:	No 'grace period' for delay in payment provided by the statutory right to reconsideration or appellate review.
Citation:	170 Cal.App.3d 244
WCC Citation:	WCC 30221985 CA

Case Name:	Jersey v. John Muir Medical Center		04/16/2002
Summary:	ESTER B. JERSEY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JOHN MUIR MEDICAL CENTER et al. , Defendants and Respondents. STATEMENT OF FACTS Plaintiff was employed by the defendant medical center in various nursing assistant and technician positions for approximately seven years. Discharging an employee for exercising a right is tortious only if the criteria enumerated in Gantt and subsequent decisions are met. The public policy that is violated must be one that is delineated by constitutional, statutory, or regulatory provisions. Suing a patient who cannot be held accountable for his actions because of a medical or psychological condition fits neither our mission nor its values.
Note:	Okay to fire hospital worker who sued patient that assaulted her at work.
Citation:	97 Cal.App.4th 814
WCC Citation:	WCC 28832002 CA