Case Name:	Rodgers v. Long Beach Civil Service Commission		08/14/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE DAN RODGERS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LONG BEACH CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION et al. , Defendants and Appellants. The City of Long Beach (the City) appeals an order granting a petition for writ of mandate directing the Long Beach Civil Service Commission (the Commission) to determine the amount of back pay and benefits the City owes respondent, Dan Rodgers. Rodgers filed a petition for writ of mandate in the Los Angeles Superior Court challenging the Commission's ruling. Rodgers appeared for a scheduled "return to work" medical examination on September 23, 2005, pursuant to the City's civil service rules. The trial court directed the Commission to calculate the amount due Rodgers and the amount of any offsets to which the City was entitled.
Note:	[Unpublished] Claim for back pay and benefits is exempt from the requirements of the Workers' Compensation Act because it is incidental to the demand for reinstatement. The City cannot, by reinstating Rodgers, eliminate his claim for back pay and benefits.
Citation:	B200060
WCC Citation:	WCC 34122008 CA

Case Name:	Rodgers v. Sargent Controls & Aerospace		01/30/2006
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE No. A110023 January 30, 2006 JAMES RODGERS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. SARGENT CONTROLS & AEROSPACE, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. Respondent Sargent Controls & Aerospace (respondent or Sargent) was alleged to be liable to appellant as a successor-in-interest to other corporate entities: Sargent Industries, Inc. , Kahr Bearing Corporation (Kahr), Aetna Steel Products Corporation (Aetna), and Arnot Marine Corporation (Arnot). In February of 1969, respondent's predecessor, Sargent Industries, Inc. , purchased 488,933 of the common outstanding shares of Kahr from a company known as GAC Corporation. *fn3 Appellant did not dispute that Sargent assumed no tort liabilities from Kahr under the stock purchase agreement. In December of 1973, the Board of Directors of Sargent merged Kahr into Sargent, and resolved to purchase the outstanding shares of Kahr not yet held by the parent company - then less than 10 percent.
Note:	Collateral estoppel does not preclude asbestos litigation on successor in interest theory.
Citation:	136 Cal. App. 4th 82
WCC Citation:	WCC 31392006 CA

Case Name:	Rodgers v. WCAB		05/22/1985
Summary:	JIMMY RODGERS, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY et al. , Respondents. [168 Cal. App. 3d 569] Richard W. Younkin, William B. Donohoe, Alvin R. Barrett, Strantz, Sobelsohn & Elkin and Ruth Sobelsohn for Respondents. We hold that the approved settlement does preclude any further claim for ordinary compensation benefits for the effects of the secondary injury. 'On the contrary, he is seeking ordinary compensation, the very benefits which were released by the compromise and release. '(1983) 33 Cal. 3d 965 [191 Cal. Rptr. 811, 663 P. 2d 534] and Morehouse v. Workers' Comp.
Note:	Employer required to pay ordinary comp. benefits if applicant injured in voc. rehab.
Citation:	168 Cal.App.3d 567
WCC Citation:	WCC 4061985 CA

Case Name:	Rodriguez v. Garden Plating Co., Intercare Holdings Insurance Services		10/26/2017
Summary:	WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             JOSE GUILLERMINA RODRIGUEZ, Applicant, .             v. .             GARDEN PLATING CO. , INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES, Defendants. .           (C) Has provided treatment authorized by the employer or claims administrator under Section 4610. .           (D) Has made a diligent search and determined that the employer does not have a medical provider network in place. .           (E) Has documentation that medical treatment has been neglected or unreasonably refused to the employee as provided by Section 4600. .           (G) Is a certified interpreter rendering services during a medicallegal examination, a copy service providing medical-legal services, or has an expense allowed as a lien under rules adopted by the administrative director.
Note:	A Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board en banc decision handed down Thursday confirmed the right of lien claimants to have a hearing on the timeliness of declarations that were due by July 1, but noted the issue was moot as the Division of Workers’ Compensation already said it would allow administrative law judges to hear such arguments.
Citation:	ADJ8588344 (MF)
WCC Citation:

Case Name:	Rodriguez v. WCAB		01/26/1994
Summary:	CARLOS RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, JERSEYMAID MILK PRODUCTS et al. , Respondents. The plan specified that the employer was required to provide all necessary vocational rehabilitation services and benefits. The copy of the plan in the Board's certified record does not contain the signatures of the employers and their attorney. Dr. Patzakis stated that applicant had constant minimal lower back pain, 'increasing to slight [and] becoming moderate with very heavy lifting. 'However, Dr. Patzakis recommended that applicant be evaluated by an agreed or independent medical examiner in psychiatry.
Note:	Despite 'liberal construction': Psychiatric reaction to work comp case not compensable; Need for non-prescriptive Rx not 'future medical'.
Citation:	21 Cal.App.4th 1747
WCC Citation:	WCC 3981994 CA

Case Name:	Roe v. WCAB		11/27/1974
Summary:	HAROLD H. ROE, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, AEROJET GENERAL CORPORATION et al. , Respondents In Bank. Roe, an employee, received severe industrial injuries in an accident featured by the negligence of a third party. Roe and the third party settled the lawsuit without reference to the employer's status. Roe then applied to the Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board for [12 Cal. 3d 887] permanent disability benefits. The referee refused to inquire into the employer's concurrent negligence, awarded Roe a permanent disability rating of 96 1/2 percent and ordered that Roe's net settlement be credited against the insurance carrier's liability for permanent disability.
Note:	Employer may get credit even though extent of employer negligence not yet decided in 3rd party suit.
Citation:	12 Cal.3d 884
WCC Citation:	WCC 23831974 CA

Case Name:	Roger Mann v. County of Madera		04/28/2011
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. OPINION Plaintiff Roger Mann sued defendant County of Madera after the county forced Mann, a deputy sheriff, into a retirement based on disability. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORIES The Madera County Sheriff's Department hired Mann in 1997. The workers' compensation administrator told the county employee that Mann was not cleared to return to work, and the county employee reported this to Benard. Mann also told her that if he could not go back to work as a patrol deputy in Madera County, he would like to work in another county, such as Merced. Mann claims a reasonable jury could not have found that the county did not apply a policy like this to Mann.
Note:	Madera County engaged in the interactive process with a disabled sheriff's deputy before forcing him into disability retirement.
Citation:	F058779
WCC Citation:	WCC 37562011 CA

Case Name:	Rogers v. WCAB		10/07/1985
Summary:	ROGERS v. WORKERS' COMP. JESSICA ROGERS, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, HUGHES AIRCRAFT COMPANY et al. , Respondents. However, the biker grabbed her from behind, struck her, beat her down, took her purse and fled on his motorcycle. Guards 'are supposed to patrol the areas at all hours, but they were on their lunch hour, I guess. 'Hughes issues decals to the employees to park in certain sections of the lot, but no particular stalls are assigned.
Note:	Applicant failed to meet burden of proof with deposition testimony alone; Board can draw reasonable inferences from evidence presented.
Citation:	172 Cal.App.3d 1195
WCC Citation:	WCC 4001985 CA

Case Name:	Rohrback vs. WCAB		01/25/1983
Summary:	PAUL ROHRBACK, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, M & J LOGGING et al. , Respondents. There is and has been no dispute between the parties on the underlying question of liability. He suffered internal injuries as well as injuries to his ribs, clavicle, and an arm. [144 Cal. App. 3d 899] Most of the proceedings below were devoted to fixing the extent of petitioner's permanent disability. The board's ultimate finding on the credit issue is not before this court, and we do not review it.
Note:	Definition of 'liability' regarding 'genuine doubt' for purposes of 5814 penalty.
Citation:	144 CA3d 896
WCC Citation:	WCC 30141983 CA

Case Name:	Rolda vs. Pitney Bowes, Inc.		02/21/2001
Summary:	In his Opinion on Decision, the WCJ also stated that applicant's psychiatric injury was not the result of a good faith personnel action. As the psychiatric injury in this case was not evaluated in this manner, we will rescind the Findings and Award of June 19. He was assigned a territory in which to work, where he would call upon existing patrons and make sales presentations to potential customers. "It would be concluded that Mr. Rolda sustained an industrial injury to the psyche. (Johnson) (1998) 63 Cal. Comp. Cases 1068 (writ denied) [supervision by harassment, ridicule, and generally unprofessional conduct is not a good faith personnel action].
Note:	Proper analysis to follow where defense is good faith personnel action.
Citation:	66 CCC 241 (En Banc)
WCC Citation:	WCC 3642001 CA