Case Law Library
| Case Name: | U.S. Auto Stores v. WCAB | 03/26/1971 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary: | U. S. AUTO STORES et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HERMAN FREDERICK BRENNER, Respondents. OPINION PETERS, J. Petitioners U. S. Auto Stores and American Hardware Mutual Insurance Company claim that the award of permanent disability of the Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board is not supported by substantial evidence and that the award is not supported by the findings. Dr. Wood estimated [4 Cal. 3d 472] applicant's permanent disability 'at no greater than 15 to 20% at the present time. . . . ' fn. [¶] The above-described factors result in a 77 1/2% reduction in his ability to compete in the open labor market. 'Com. , 30 Cal. Comp. Cases 336, relied upon by U. S. Auto Stores, are not in point. | ||
| Note: | Referee's failure to make specific findings of disabling extent and effect of factors was waived by failure to raise in petition. | ||
| Citation: | 4 Cal.3d 469 | ||
| WCC Citation: | WCC 26711971 CA | ||
| Case Name: | Universal City Studios, Inc., v. WCAB | 12/12/1979 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary: | UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and BERNICE LEWIS, Respondents. Her employer, petitioner Universal City Studios, Inc. (Universal), petitioned for writ of review before this court. 3 At the conclusion of the cross-examination of Dr. Rolston and the rating specialist, Universal moved that Dr. Rolston's report and the rating be stricken. Specifically, Universal contended that Dr. Rolston did not use the term 'semi-sedentary work' within the meaning as stated in the Rating Schedule. Universal also asserted that Dr. Rolston's description of Lewis' subjective complaints and physical ability were inconsistent with a restriction of semisedentary work. | ||
| Note: | Worker may receive 100% PD although able to return to work at prior wages; judge allowing rater to decide among evidentiary facts is improper. | ||
| Citation: | 99 Cal.App.3d 647 | ||
| WCC Citation: | WCC 25191979 CA | ||
| Case Name: | Unruh vs. Truck Ins. Exchange | 07/21/1972 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary: | ORPHA UNRUH, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE et al. , Defendants and Respondents In Bank. The second amended complaint (hereinafter for convenience referred to as "complaint") names as defendants Truck Insurance Exchange (Truck), Farmers Insurance Group (Farmers), William Baker and Lawrence Marino fn. On March 31, 1960, plaintiff injured her back while working for an employer insured under the workmen's compensation laws by defendant Truck. Exchange (1958) 157 Cal. App. 2d 759 [321 P. 2d 831] (negligence and conspiracy in providing medical treatment); State Comp. It is convenient to note at this point that this issue before us pertains only to defendant Truck, the sole compensation carrier of plaintiff's employer. | ||
| Note: | WCAB has exclusive jurisdiction on negligent acts of carrier, but not intentional; Employer may 'set off' award against civil damages. | ||
| Citation: | 7 Cal.3d 616 | ||
| WCC Citation: | WCC 28611972 CA | ||
| Case Name: | Uranga v. Continental Casualty Co. | 03/24/2009 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary: | IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX MATTSON URANGA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO. , Defendant and Respondent. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Appellant's employer, National Ready Mix, had two insurance policies; one for commercial automobile coverage and another for workers' compensation benefits. CNA, through respondent Continental Casualty Company, provided uninsured and underinsured motorist benefits. Appellant filed a claim against the driver who caused the collision and a claim for workers' compensation benefits. Appellant's workers' compensation claim against National Ready Mix was resolved by stipulation on November 30, 2004, in the amount of $168,687. 93. | ||
| Note: | [Unpublished] A carrier did not breach the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by making low settlement offers during the arbitration process. | ||
| Citation: | B205995 | ||
| WCC Citation: | WCC 35062009 CA | ||
| Case Name: | Uwaydah v. Roth | 05/18/2010 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary: | On December 20, 2007, Weiss sent Roth a letter about Frost's investigation, welcoming Roth's direct inquiries regarding Uwaydah if there was a legitimate reason. Uwaydah heard nothing more from Roth until January 7, 2009, when, by chance, he learned Roth had sent two subpoenas, dated September 5, 2008 (attached as exhibits to the complaint), to Jindy Bal, counsel for Tustin Hospital (one of the locations where Uwaydah practices). *fn3 Uwaydah is informed and believes Roth continues to contact hospitals and other third parties "fishing" for information to deny Uwaydah's claims. On the basis of these allegations, Uwaydah (and Frontline, included in our further references to Uwaydah) sued Roth for abuse of process. While Uwaydah misrepresents some of the contentfor example, Roth said, he made no "negative statements" about Uwaydah, the communications complained of were communications in the course of this investigation. | ||
| Note: | [Unpublished] Plaintiff failed to meet his burden to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on his abuse of process claim, and defendant's motion was properly granted. | ||
| Citation: | B217606 | ||
| WCC Citation: | WCC 36252010 CA | ||
5 Results
- 1
