Case Name:	Wagner vs. Allied Signal		04/20/2001
Summary:	Ed Note: This case was expressly overruled by the 2nd District Court of Appeals in Honeywell v. WCAB (Wagner). A review of the record reveals that applicant was employed by defendant Allied Signal Aerospace from 1982 through 1999. The July 20,1998 notation states, in pertinent part, as follows: ". . . Has tried many times to deal with this industrial stress reduction in various forms. The October 16, 1998 message was placed in applicant's personnel file, and reads as follows: "Received an audix message from William Wagner's wife, Linda. "Wife is concerned that she does everything necessary to protect Bill's employment with Allied Signal.
Note:	Duty to provide claim form when reasonable certainty of claim of industrial injury.
Citation:	66 CCC 483 (En Banc)
WCC Citation:	WCC 29012001 CA

Case Name:	Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. WCAB (Garcia)		10/30/2003
Summary:	1 Velta Elaine Garcia ("Applicant") suffered an admitted orthopedic injury to her back while employed by Wal-Mart ("Employer") in February of 1995. (1993) 16 Cal. App. 4th 227, 233), the issue before us is one of law, which we review de novo. This subdivision shall not apply if the psychiatric injury is caused by a sudden and extraordinary employment condition. "The statute, which contains other provisions governing and to some extent limiting benefits for psychiatric claims, fn. Again, we stress that whether the statute could reasonably, or even wisely, be amended is not before us.
Note:	Psychiatric injury arising out of physical injury is governed by LC 3208.3 limitations.
Citation:	112 Cal.App.4th 1435
WCC Citation:	WCC 29602003 CA

Case Name:	Wall Units, Inc. v. SCIF		06/09/2008
Summary:	Plaintiff Wall Units, Inc. (Wall Units) pursued a class action lawsuit against defendant State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) for allegedly misreporting the loss experience in workers' compensation insurance claims. Following further proceedings in the trial court, in February of 2007, Wall Units moved for certification of a class of employer plaintiffs who had "declared noncompensable" claims that SCIF had misreported. )*fn2 The new class definition framed by Wall Units after our prior opinion in 2006 encompassed all three prongs of the "declared non-compensable" definition. SCIF first learned of the Wiley claim on July 16, 1991, and denied the claim on October 15, 1992. Wall Units complains that the trial court's order denying class certification struck eight paragraphs in a supporting declaration provided by Wall Units.
Note:	[Unpublished] The trial court used proper legal criteria and assumptions in denying class certification when it focused on the absence of 'common questions of law or fact.'
Citation:	B200331
WCC Citation:	WCC 33822008 CA

Case Name:	Waqia v. City of Oakland		11/28/2007
Summary:	INTRODUCTION In this wrongful termination action, Delmont Waqia (Waqia) appeals following a jury verdict in favor of his former employer, the City of Oakland (the City). Waqia filed an action against the OFD and the City (collectively the City), alleging religious and gender discrimination, as well as retaliation. The parties agreed that Waqia or his attorney would meet with someone from the city attorney's office to discuss the matter further. In June 2003, Waqia filed a complaint against the City, alleging that the City acted in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. At trial, the City presented evidence regarding the 1993 sexual harassment claim against Waqia, as well as the surrounding circumstances of his 2002 arrest.
Note:	[Unpublished] Although the statutory burden to accommodate rests with the employer, an employee cannot shirk his duties to try to accommodate himself or to cooperate with his employer in reaching an accommodation by a mere recalcitrant citation of religious precepts.
Citation:	A114704
WCC Citation:	WCC 32822007 CA

Case Name:	Ward v. City of Desert Hot Springs		09/25/2006
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIGNIFICANT PANEL DECISION Case No. RIV 0069499 KATHY WARD, Applicant, vs. CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS; permissibly self-insured and administered by HAZELRIGG RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, Defendant. Therefore, the Order of May 5, 2006, properly denied defendant's request to compel applicant's examination pursuant to section 4064(d). On or about November 4, 2005, defendant arranged for applicant to be examined by Stuart Meisner, Ph. D. Applicant, through her counsel, refused to be examined by Dr. Meisner, asserting that the examination was impermissible pursuant to sections 4060 and 4062. 2. On May 5, 2006, the WCJ issued the Findings and Order of which defendant sought reconsideration or, in the alternative, from which it seeks removal.
Note:	For claimed injuries occurring on or after 1/1/05, where claimant represented by an attorney, correct med-legal procedure for compensability is 4062.2 only; reports under 4064(d) are inadmissable.
Citation:	71 CCC 1313
WCC Citation:	WCC 31842006 CA

Case Name:	Warner v. WCAB		12/27/2011
Summary:	WARNER v. WCAB RICHARD WARNER, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondents. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS TURNER, P. J. Petitioner, Richard Warner, is a firefighter employed by the County of Los Angeles (the county). Island residents will go to petitioner's house for assistance if they live nearby or if an injury occurs near his home. As petitioner was going down the front stairs of his house, his wife asked him to help her trim the wisteria. Petitioner, Richard Warner, shall recover his costs incurred in connection with these writ proceedings.
Note:	A firefighter's decision to help his wife trim the wisteria in front of their Catalina Island home was incidentally related to his job because island residents would occasionally go to his home for emergency help.
Citation:	B232190
WCC Citation:	WCC 38382011 CA

Case Name:	Waste Management vs. Superior Court		06/01/2004
Summary:	WASTE MANAGEMENT INC. , et al. , Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Respondent; ROSA M. GUZMAN de PERALTA et al. , Real Parties in Interest. OPINION MCCONNELL, P. J. - Rafael Peralta Rios (Rafael) was killed by a trash truck while working as a mechanic for Waste Management of California, Inc. (WMCI). 1988) Torts, § 6, p. 61; Romero v. Superior Court (2001) 89 Cal. App. 4th 1068, 1078. )Code, § 3852; Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal. 4th 689, 697; Orosco v. Sun-Diamond Corp. (1997) 51 Cal. App. 4th 1659, 1664. )Likewise in this case, the Peraltas adequately pleaded independent negligent or wrongful acts by Waste Management, Inc. and USA Waste of California (together, WMI).
Note:	Parent not liable to employee of subsidiary for injury/death where parent lacked control.
Citation:	119 Cal. App. 4th 105; 13 Cal. Rptr. 3d 910
WCC Citation:	WCC 29862004 CA

Case Name:	Watters Associates v. Superior Court		02/25/1991
Summary:	WATTERS ASSOCIATES et al. , Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, Respondent; GARDCO MANUFACTURING, INC. , et al. , Real Parties in Interest. (Superior Court of Alameda County, No. H127070-9, Joanne C. Parrilli, Judge. )In Watters Associates v. Superior Court (1990) 218 Cal. App. 3d 1322 [267 Cal. Rptr. 696] (Watters I) we held that an injured temporary employee could not pursue a civil action against his employment agency for an injury caused by his temporary employer's removal of the point of operation guard on a power press. Lamont G. Conley, registered as a temporary manufacturing employee, was sent by petitioners Watters Associates, Watters Personnel Service, and/or Shirley Watters (identified collectively as agency hereafter) to the business premises of real party in interest Gardco Manufacturing, Inc. (temporary employer hereafter). (Santa Cruz Poultry, Inc. v. Superior Court (1987) 194 Cal. App. 3d [227 Cal. App. 3d 1346] 575, 578-579 [239 Cal. Rptr.
Note:	Temp agency exempted from liability for damages recovered by employee.
Citation:	227 Cal.App.3d 1341
WCC Citation:	WCC 23951991 CA

Case Name:	Wayne Lewis v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board		11/21/2008
Summary:	Lewis v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, 168 Cal. App. 4th 696, 85 Cal. Rptr. 3d 661 (Cal. App. Dist. 3 11/21/2008) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) No. C057392 November 21, 2008 WAYNE LEWIS, PETITIONER, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, BEUTLER HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, ET AL. ; RESPONDENTS. No appearance for Respondents Workers' Compensation Appeals Board or Beutler Heating & Air Conditioning. CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION As part of its 2004 comprehensive reform of the workers' compensation laws, the Legislature adopted a new schedule for rating permanent disability. B ACKGROUND Wayne Lewis suffered an admitted injury to his low back on August 18, 2004, while working for Beutler Heating and Air Conditioning. It is undisputed that Lewis also had a prior back injury treated by lumbar fusion surgery.
Note:	A physician's report stating that an applicant cannot return to his regular job duties and may need vocational rehabilitation indicates the existence of permanent disability and triggers use of the 1997 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule instead of the version adopted in 2005.
Citation:	C057392
WCC Citation:	WCC 34642008 CA

Case Name:	Wayne Oberreuter et al v. Traylor Brothers		05/05/2011
Summary:	COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA D056637 May 5, 2011 WAYNE OBERREUTER ET AL. , PLAINTIFFS, CROSS-DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS, v. TRAYLOR BROTHERS, DEFENDANT, CROSS-COMPLAINANT AND RESPONDENT. Mountain was the subcontractor hired by a general contractor, defendant Traylor Brothers, Inc. (Traylor), to provide hauling services for a construction project. Oberreuter and his wife filed this action against Traylor seeking damages, and Traylor moved for summary judgment under the "Privette/Hooker"*fn1 doctrine. The trial court concluded there was no triable issue of material fact, and Privette/Hooker barred Oberreuter's claims against Traylor, and entered judgment in favor of Traylor. Procedural History Oberreuter and his wife filed the present action against Traylor, among others, asserting Traylor was negligent.
Note:	California's common law Hooker/Privette doctrine barred an subcontractor's employee from suing a general contractor.
Citation:	D056637
WCC Citation:	WCC 37602011 CA