Case Name:	Maples v. WCAB		11/06/1980
Summary:	On November 14, 1977, Dr. Earle E. Crandall, M. D. , a neurological surgeon, medically evaluated Maples on behalf of Eldorado and issued a report to Eldorado in which he found Maples to be permanent and stationary. Reporting on behalf of Maples was J. H. Abramson, M. D. , who examined Maples on October 23, 1978. Apparently Eldorado did not immediately advise Maples of the reason for the termination of temporary disability benefits in August 1978. When cross-examined on August 14, 1979, Dr. Smith testified that if Maples had testified that he had little improvement, if any, since Dr. Crandall's examination, then he would agree with Dr. Crandall that Maples was permanent and stationary on November 14, 1977. It was not until April 10, 1979, that Eldorado finally filed a formal petition to terminate liability for temporary disability as required by WCAB Rules of Practice and Procedure (hereinafter WCAB Rules) sections 10462 fn.
Note:	Employer/insurer cannot claim credit for overpayment of TD because of unreasonable delay in filing med. report and not filing petition to terminate TD after terminating benefits.
Citation:	111 Cal.App.3d 827, 45 CCC 1106
WCC Citation:	WCC 24881980 CA

Case Name:	Maraj v. Ralphs Grocery Company		05/25/2011
Summary:	MARAJ v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY SHANTIE MARAJ, et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. As plaintiff Shantie Maraj, an on-duty employee of defendant Ralphs Grocery Company (Ralphs), tried to raise the flag on the flag pole at the market where she worked, she suffered a severe neck fracture and other injuries when a shopping cart, which had been hoisted up the pole as a prank by third parties, fell on her head. Lizarraga told another employee (Susan) to call Med-core, the company Ralphs calls when an employee is injured, and Med-core told Susan to call 911, which she did. The court did not reach the other two issues raised by Ralphs: whether Ralphs fraudulently concealed the existence of plaintiff's injuries or their connection with plaintiff's employment. Plaintiff sued Ralphs erroneously as The Kroger Company.
Note:	An exception to the exclusive remedy rule did not apply to an injured grocery store employee's civil suit because she could not prove that Ralphs Grocery Co. concealed her injury, the 2nd District Court of Appeal concluded.
Citation:	B223410
WCC Citation:	WCC 37672011 CA

Case Name:	Maranian v. WCAB		06/26/2000
Summary:	The WCJ therefore applied the statutory presumption, concluded Maranian had sustained a work-related injury, and awarded benefits. On June 6, 1997, Simplot filed a petition with respondent WCAB seeking reconsideration of the WCJ's award in favor of Maranian. The WCAB decision challenged by Maranian did not decide the merits of Maranian's claim for compensation, and it is possible Maranian may succeed, at the ordered plenary trial, in proving liability and a right to the benefits he wants. A legally incorrect decision by the WCAB barring application of the presumption would prevent Maranian from exercising a substantial right to which he is lawfully entitled--the benefit of the statutory presumption. The WCAB obviously agreed the WCJ's order was final for purposes of section 5900, because it granted Industrial's petition for reconsideration; had the order not been final, the WCAB should not have agreed to reconsider.
Note:	90-day limitation runs from date of receipt of Claim Form; Order on Recon final re appellate review.
Citation:	81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 65 CCC 650
WCC Citation:	WCC 24912000 CA

Case Name:	Margaret A. Seltzer v. William Gwire		04/20/2012
Summary:	Margaret A. Seltzer v. William Gwire No. A128902 (Cal. App. Dist. 1 04/20/2012) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE A128902 April 20, 2012 MARGARET A. SELTZER, CROSS-COMPLAINANT AND APPELLANT, v. WILLIAM GWIRE, CROSS-DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. (hereafter Seltzer I); Seltzer v. Gwire (Nov. 5, 2009, A119521) [nonpub. Gwire filed a motion for attorney fees incurred in proceeding Seltzer I, again under Code of Civil Procedure section 425. 16, subdivision (c). *fn2 In opposition, Seltzer argued Gwire had failed to carry his burden of demonstrating the requested fees were reasonably necessary and reasonable in amount. The court's award included an amount for taxable costs in two appeals to which Gwire and Seltzer were parties, Seltzer I, supra, A119049 and Seltzer v. Gwire, supra, A119521.
Note:	An attorney, represented in a civil action by a former employee of his firm, was entitled to recover his legal fees as the prevailing party in the underlying action.
Citation:	A128902
WCC Citation:	WCC 38872012 CA

Case Name:	Marin Schools Insurance Authority v. Schools Excess Liability Fund		07/11/2017
Summary:	Filed 7/11/17 Marin Schools Insurance Authority v. Schools Excess Liability Fund CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE 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(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115(a).   IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE .             MARIN SCHOOLS INSURANCE AUTHORITY, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             SCHOOLS EXCESS LIABILITY FUND, Defendant and Respondent. .             A145365 .             (Napa County Super. Ct. No. 26-62558) .             In this indemnity action, plaintiff Marin Schools Insurance Authority (MSIA) appeals the trial court’s orders granting summary judgment to defendant Schools Excess Liability Fund (SELF) and awarding fees. Current Lawsuit .           The Claim ultimately reached the excess coverage limit and when MSIA requested reimbursement from SELF, SELF refused.
Note:
Citation:	A145365
WCC Citation:	Napa County Super. Ct. No. 26-62558

Case Name:	Marine v. College of Sequoias		02/01/2012
Summary:	MARINE v. COLLEGE OF SEQUOIAS ROSALINDA MARINE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COLLEGE OF THE SEQUOIAS, Defendant and Respondent. Lockyer v. Shamrock Foods Co. (2000) 24 Cal. 4th 415, 431; Burden v. Snowden (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 556, 562. )Collateral Estoppel Collateral estoppel, which is also known as issue preclusion, "prevents `relitigation of issues argued and decided in prior proceedings. 'The administrative decision included findings that the evidence established Castillo's continued unsatisfactory attendance and failure to improve, and Castillo's discharge was appropriate. Initially we note that we need not determine whether a community college district is a "school district" exempted from the provisions of section 1094. 6.
Note:	A college employee fired after getting into a fight with a co-worker's sister and being tried for assault with a deadly weapon could not challenge her termination, but she could pursue her claims of retaliation and discrimination based on her request for accommodation of her disabilities.
Citation:	F061765
WCC Citation:	WCC 38532012 CA

Case Name:	Marinwood Community Services v. WCAB (Ramos)		03/29/2017
Summary:	Filed 3/29/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO .             MARINWOOD COMMUNITY SERVICES, Petitioner, .             v. .             WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, RAMOS et al. , Respondents. .             A147582 .             (WCAB No. ADJ8778127) .             Petitioner Marinwood Fire Protection District, also known as Marinwood Community Services, Inc. (Marinwood), seeks to set aside the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) holding that firefighter Pete Romo was entitled to the benefit of the rebuttable presumption under Labor Code section 3212. 11 that his cancer arose out of his employment. .           Volunteer positions with Marinwood were sought after by those who wanted to become firefighters, and the hiring process was competitive. .           The WCJ and WCAB rejected Marinwood’s interpretation and embraced Romo’s. .           We concur .           KLINE, P. J. .           RICHMAN, J.
Note:
Citation:	A147582
WCC Citation:	WCAB No. ADJ8778127

Case Name:	Market Basket v. WCAB		10/31/1978
Summary:	MARKET BASKET, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JUANITA ALLEN, Respondents. OPINION HANSON, J. Petitioner Market Basket contends that the appeals board erred in finding respondent Juanita Allen sustained psychiatric disability as the result of her admitted industrial injury while employed by Market Basket and that if substantial evidence does support such finding then the appeals board erred in not apportioning the psychiatric disability. Facts On March 21, 1975, Allen sustained an admitted injury arising out of and occurring in the course of her employment for Market Basket as a grocery checker. Market Basket obtained a psychiatric evaluation from Carl E. Graner, M. D. Market Basket then petitioned for reconsideration by the board.
Note:	Physician's report defective where no reference to preexisting psychiatric condition.
Citation:	86 Cal.App.3d 137, 43 CCC 1186
WCC Citation:	WCC 28081978 CA

Case Name:	Marquez v. Novellus Systems		02/23/2009
Summary:	Filed 2/23/09 Marquez v. Novellus Systems CA6 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 SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT MIGUEL ANGEL MARQUEZ, et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. NOVELLUS SYSTEMS, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. Ct. No. CV074284) In this wrongful death action based on premises liability, defendant Novellus Systems, Inc. (Novellus) obtained summary judgment on the ground that the decedent was the employee of a contractor Novellus had hired to work on its property. In October 2004 Novellus retained ArborScience, Inc. to trim and cut trees on property owned by Novellus. Novellus provided a declaration by John Blanchette, the facilities manager at Novellus, who had hired ArborScience to do the tree-trimming work on the Novellus property.
Note:	A property owner is not liable to a dead tree trimmer's estate because it did not owe him a duty to protect him from a wood chipper.
Citation:	H033103
WCC Citation:	WCC 34982009 CA

Case Name:	Marquez v. WCAB		07/28/1995
Summary:	Richard Marquez Painting et al. , Petitioners v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, Robert Moore, Respondents. Injury 1 (FRE 125670) On February 22, 1990, the 28-year-old Moore was working for Richard Marquez Painting (Marquez) when he picked up a one hundred pound sand pot. 'Marquez was insured by Transamerica Insurance Company (Transamerica). Procedural Facts On or about August 19, 1993, Moore filed an Application for Adjudication of Claim for his February 22, 1990, Marquez injury (FRE 125670). Marquez was not Moore's employer at the time of the August 28, 1991, Kious injury, and was not a co-defendant' in FRE 112615.
Note:	Lien not allowed for overpaid disability benefits against subsequent employer comp. payments.
Citation:	60 CCC 711
WCC Citation:	WCC 25061995 CA