Case Name:	Regents of Univ. of CA v. WCAB (Ryan)		02/20/1998
Summary:	Regents of the University of California, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Gloria Ryan, Respondents. Applicant sustained admitted industrial injuries to her back on 1/19/95, and to her psyche during the period 9/19/93 through 4/18/95. Defendant sought reconsideration on the grounds that the WCAB is vested with equitable power to credit Defendant with attorney's fees and costs from the superior court action against Applicant's future workers' compensation benefits. Petitioner seeks to offset any workers' compensation benefits awarded by an attorney fee award in a related superior court action. Labor Code section 4901 provides that compensation awards may not be taken for the debts of the worker except as 'hereinafter provided. '
Note:	No offset of comp. award by civil award in action from same injury.
Citation:	63 CCC 335 (Writ Denied)
WCC Citation:	WCC 25141998 CA

Case Name:	Rehab Unit Administrative Guidelines		02/14/1997
Summary:	INDEX ^1-10-01^ Application of Administrative Guidelines ^8-10-01^ Undocumented Workers ^8-10-02^ Injured Worker Living Out-of-State/Country (Amended effective September 25, 1998) ^8-10-03^ Non-English Speaking Qualified Injured Worker (Amended effective September 25, 1998) ^8-10-04^ Return to Modified/Alternate Work via the RU-94 (Amended effective September 25, 1998) ^8-20-00^ Qualified Rehabilitation Representative (Amended effective September 4, 1997) ^8-20-01^ Independent Vocational Evaluator ^8-20-02^ Work Evaluation/Testing ^8-30-01^ Employee Requests for Vocational Rehabilitation Services ^8-30-01. 1^ Deferral/Interruption of Rehabilitation Services ^8-30-01. 2^ Employee Request for Reinstatement of Rehabilitation Services (Amended effective September 4, 1997) ^8-30-01. 3^ Declination and Employee Request for Services Following Declination ^8-30-01. 4^ Statute of Limitations ^8-30-02^ Initiation of Vocational Services/Referral to a Qualified Rehabilitation Representative (Amended effective September 4, 1997) ^8-30-02. 1^ Change of Qualified Rehabilitation Representative ^8-30-02. 2^ Waiver of Qualified Rehabilitation Representative ^8-30-03^ Identification of Vocational Feasability ^8-40-00^ Continuous Trauma/Multiple Employers ^8-40-01^ Disputed Compensability and Compromise and Release Cases ^8-40-02^ Uninsured Employer Fund Cases ^8-50-00^ Nature, Extent and Duration of Plan Services ^8-50-01^ Plan Evaluation and Approval ^8-50-01. 1^ Subsequent Rehabilitation Plan ^8-50-02^ Vocational Rehabilitation Maintenance Allowance/Vocational Rehabilitation Temporary Disability (Amended effective September 25, 1998) ^8-50-02. 1^ Vocational Rehabilitation Maintenance Allowance/Vocational Rehabilitation Temporary Disability During On-the job Training (Suspended effective June 5, 1997) ^8-50-02. 2^ Maintenance Benefits due to Public Safety Employees ^8-50-03^ Self-employment/Capital Investment (Amended effective September 4, 1997) ^8-50-04^ Additional Living Expenses (Amended effective September 25, 1998) ^8-50-04. 1^ Transportation Expenses ^8-50-04. 2^ Relocation Expenses ^8-50-04. 3^ Tools ^8-50-05^ Job Placement ^8-50-06^ Plan for Modified/Alternate Work via the RU-102 ^8-60-00^ Interpreting Fees ^8-60-01^ Multiple Rehabilitation Providers ^8-60-02^ Sub Rosa Films ^8-60-03^ Service of Medical/Vocational Reports ^8-60-04^ Dispute Resolution ^8-60-05^ Determinations ^8-60-06^ Enforcement of Unit Determinations ^8-60-07^ Attorney Fees ^8-60-08^ Fee Disputes ^8-60-09^ Communication with the Parties ^8-60-10^ Venue Assignment, Maintenance and Transfer of Case Files ^8-60-11^ Jurisdiction of the Rehabilitation Unit ^8-60-12^ Proceedings before the WCAB/Procedures following Appeal ^8-70-00^ Conclusions/Terminations ^8-80-00^ Public Access to Rehabilitation Unit Records/H. I. V. Case Handling ^8-80-01^ Considerations For Audit Referral
Note:	The Rehabilitation Unit's published guidelines.
Citation:	N/A
WCC Citation:	WCC 26931997 CA

Case Name:	Reich, Adell, Crost & Perry v. WCAB		01/01/2001
Summary:	As required by Section 10860 of the WCAB Rules of Practice and Procedure (hereinafter 'WCAB Rules'), the judge filed a report on each petition for reconsideration wherein he responded to the contentions made by petitioner. In doing so consideration should be given to the standards set forth in WCAB Rules Section 10775 and in the WCAB Policy & Procedure Manual. Thus, while the WCAB should not lightly disregard a fee agreement between the attorney and his client, such an agreement is not binding upon the WCAB. Similarly, Section 10776 of the WCAB Rules [n6] does not declare attorneys fee agreements necessarily invalid, but only requires their prompt submission to the WCAB for review. If dissatisfied with the fee awarded the attorney's recourse is to seek reconsideration by the WCAB.
Note:	Notice to atty. required before Bd. reduces fee that was agreed to by client in the settlement before Bd. for approval.
Citation:	44 CCC 1119
WCC Citation:	WCC 27192001 CA

Case Name:	Reichelt v. Slotnick		07/30/2010
Summary:	Filed 7/30/10 Reichelt v. Slotnick CA2/4 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(b). Lawrence Reichelt, in pro. Lawrence Kevin Reichelt appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendant and respondent George Slotnick following the sustaining of a demurrer to ppellant's third amended complaint. He also argues the trial court erred in sustaining respondents demurrer to causes of action in the second amended complaint. We find that the third amended complaint stated insufficient facts upon which to base a cause of action.
Note:	An injured worker's breach of contract suit against his former attorney failed because he did not adequately plead his case.
Citation:	B215506
WCC Citation:	WCC 36522010 CA

Case Name:	Reiman v. WCAB		02/02/1977
Summary:	MILFORD H. REIMAN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, Respondents (Opinion by Rattigan, J. , with Caldecott, P. J. , and Christian, J. , concurring. )[66 Cal. App. 3d 734] OPINION RATTIGAN, J. Milford H. Reiman (hereinafter applicant) is the recipient of benefits in a proceeding conducted pursuant to the workers' compensation law. In January 1973, applicant and Barbara Jean Reiman, his wife, petitioned the appeals board for an order reimbursing Mrs. Reiman for 'practical nursing services' which applicant conceived to be self-procured medical treatment. In February 1973, Mrs. Reiman herself filed a 'Notice and Request for Allowance of Lien' in which she claimed a lien, for her services, against any award to be made to applicant upon the petition. In the report, and among other things, she stated her determinations that 'this case is governed by Henson vs. WCAB (Standard Oil Company) 37 CCC 654 and that Mrs. Reiman is entitled to payment for the reasonable value of her services. '
Note:	No lien or credit for voluntary payments as gifts separate from compensation.
Citation:	66 Cal.App.3d 732
WCC Citation:	WCC 25131977 CA

Case Name:	Reiner v. Greyhound Lines		10/17/2017
Summary:	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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT .             MARTIN REINER, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             GREYHOUND LINES INC. et al. , Defendants and Respondents. .             GREYHOUND LINES INC. et al. , Defendants and Respondents. .             Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, Roy G. Weatherup, Kenneth C. Feldman, Caroline E. Chan and David D. Samani for Defendants and Respondents Greyhound Lines Inc. , FirstGroup America, Inc. , and Tricia Martinez. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND .           In March 2014, Reiner acted as counsel for two defendant employees of Greyhound Lines Inc. in Yennisen de Santiago v. Greyhound Lines Inc. Greyhound was represented by Ian Wade for Littler Mendelson, P. C. .           In September 2014, Reiner sent a series of emails to Wade and Greyhound’s in-house counsel, Tricia Martinez, purporting to represent another individual who had claims against Greyhound and knew facts that could be used against Greyhound in the Santiago litigation. You can cooperate and save Greyhound significantly, or you can be uncooperative and cause Greyhound significant harm. ” .           On October 1, 2014, Martinez sent an email to Wade and Reiner saying, “Please provide me with the proper ‘authorities’ to whom I should address a compliant [sic] against Reiner.
Note:	California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal refused to reinstate a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress filed by an attorney disbarred earlier this year for not abiding the terms of his probation for willfully disobeying three orders issued by workers’ compensation judges.
Citation:	B265943 c/w B269440
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC564127

Case Name:	Reiner v. Kebel, Tobin & Truce		03/08/2012
Summary:	MARTIN REINER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. KEGEL, TOBIN & TRUCE et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Berger Kahn, and Steven H. Gentry for Defendants and Respondents Kegel, Tobin & Truce and Sheila Kashani. True to his word, Reiner brought suit against Kashani and her law firm, Kegel, Tobin & Truce (Kegel), as well as their client, Commerce and Industry Insurance (Commerce) on September 21, 2010 for defamation and fraud. DISCUSSION On appeal, Reiner challenges the trial court's orders granting the anti-SLAPP motion and denying Reiner the right of discovery with regard to the attorney fee and costs award. However, Reiner provides no legal authority to support a contention that he is entitled to discovery on the issue.
Note:	A defamation action by a California workers' compensation defense attorney against defense counsel in another case involving the same claimant was subject to a special motion to strike as a strategic lawsuit against public participation, a state appellate court ruled.
Citation:	B234815
WCC Citation:	WCC 38692012 CA

Case Name:	Respini v. RMG Electric, Inc.		08/21/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE HELEN RESPINI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RMG ELECTRIC, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. Ct. No. SCV-237730) Plaintiff was severely injured in an automobile accident involving an employee of defendant RMG Electric, Inc. (RMG) and seeks to hold RMG vicariously liable for her injuries. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Helen Respini filed an action against defendant Micah Ashley, alleging injury and economic loss as a result of an automobile accident involving Ashley. As he explained, RMG employs a person referred to as a 'shop boy' to transport materials from the shop to RMG worksites as they are needed on the job. Gugel further confirmed that Ashley was not required by RMG to drive his personal vehicle to the worksite and was not reimbursed by RMG for his travel expenses.
Note:	[Unpublished] Plaintiff submitted evidence sufficient to support a jury finding that employee's trip was within the scope of his employment.
Citation:	A119232
WCC Citation:	WCC 34132008 CA

Case Name:	Rex Club et al. v. WCAB (SCIF)		03/31/1997
Summary:	The REX CLUB et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and State Compensation Insurance Fund et al. , Respondents. (e)) against the Rex Club, seeking reimbursement for a portion of the workers' compensation benefits SCIF paid to the injured worker. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rejected the Rex Club's position that the petition for contribution should be dismissed as untimely. By petition for writ of review, the Rex Club and its insurer, Aetna Casualty and Surety Company (hereafter collectively referred to as Rex Club), seek to annul the WCAB's order finding that SCIF's petition for contribution is not time-barred. Thereafter, Rex Club and Fairlane Meat Market-two other employers for whom the applicant had worked during that period-were joined as defendants.
Note:	Since the original findings of fact and award issued in November 1987 constitute 'an award' of compensation benefits within the meaning of section 5500.5, subdivision (e), the WCAB's petition for contribution filed in November 1994 is untimely as to that award.
Citation:	C022162
WCC Citation:	WCC 37091997 CA

Case Name:	Reyes v. Van Elk, Ltd.		03/14/2007
Summary:	CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION Plaintiffs Jose Reyes, Francisco Reyes, Jose Perez and Carlos Flores were employed by defendant Van Elk, Ltd. ("Van Elk") on allegedly public works projects which were subject to California's prevailing wage law. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SYNOPSIS Plaintiffs performed welding-related work for Van Elk on different construction projects in Los Angeles County. When Perez was asked if he provided false employment information to Van Elk, he objected, but admitted he had. However, judgment was only entered in favor of three of the four defendants - - Van Elk, Fidelity and Fassberg. There is some indication in the record that Van Elk did not ask for employment authorization documents from plaintiffs.
Note:	Undocumented workers' have standing to raise prevailing wage claims, and the prevailing wage law is not preempted by the IRAC.
Citation:	148 Cal. App. 4th 604
WCC Citation:	WCC 32112007 CA