Case Name:	Garza v. Asbestos Corporation, Ltd.		03/28/2008
Summary:	Bockstahler prepared a document around 1982 to show the amounts of chrysotile asbestos used by Eagle-Pitcher in its production processes and the suppliers of that asbestos. Bockstahler stated that Asbestos Corporation Limited ("ACL") was the sole supplier of chrysotile asbestos fiber to Eagle-Pitcher between 1935 and 1957. ACL's company brochures published in 1956 and 1961 described extensively the nature and extent of the company's asbestos operations, including the mining techniques employed, the tonnages of asbestos extracted, the grades and types of asbestos produced, the physical and chemical properties of asbestos, the special characteristics of its asbestos fibers, and the types of products for which its different grades of asbestos were suitable. Moreover, Charles Ay explained asbestos can be friable or non-friable--friable asbestos you can crumble by hand and easily release the fibers, whereas the fibers from non-friable asbestos have to be released mechanically. A friable product like the insulating cement releases asbestos much easier than other non-friable products Joseph Garza had worked with like gaskets and packing.
Note:	By filing an answer and litigating the case to trial, Defendant made a general appearance and submitted voluntarily to the jurisdiction of the court.
Citation:	A116523
WCC Citation:	WCC 33332008 CA

Case Name:	Garza v. WCAB (Sup. Ct. en banc)		10/20/1970
Summary:	JOE M. GARZA, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, McDONNELL-DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANY et al. , Respondents. On pushing the stand with his shoulder, petitioner felt something 'foreign' in his back, and a sharp pain in his tailbone. He first saw a dentist, who found nothing wrong with petitioner's teeth and who referred petitioner to other doctors. We find his back complaints and the treatment obtained therefor are attributable to the pre-existing condition reflected in the record. 'Moreover, in its opinion on reconsideration the board did not purport to rely upon this portion of Dr.
Note:	Generally, WCAB must accept as true uncontradicted and unimpeached evidence.
Citation:	3 Cal.3d 312, 35 CCC 500
WCC Citation:	WCC 26941970 CA

Case Name:	Garzoli v. WCAB		04/30/1970
Summary:	SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA No. 29701 April 30, 1970 LAURA EDITH GARZOLI, PETITIONER, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ET AL. , RESPONDENTS Morgan, Beauzay & Hammer and Victor H. Beauzay for Petitioner. Everett A. Corten, Rupert A. Pedrin, Nathan Mudge, Gabriel Sipos, T. Groezinger, Loton Wells and Arthur C. Jones for Respondents. On June 6, 1968, he began his regular shift at 4 p. m. and "checked out" with the lieutenant or watch manager at midnight. A few minutes later, his motorcycle was struck by a negligently driven automobile, and he sustained severe injuries, which caused his death July 4, 1968. In none of those cases, however, was the police officer riding conspicuously on the public streets in full uniform on a motorcycle.
Note:	Coming and going defense not applicable if officer required to wear uniform and render assistance.
Citation:	2 Cal. 3d 502
WCC Citation:	WCC 30451970 CA

Case Name:	Gay v. WCAB, Guarantee Collection Co.		08/30/1979
Summary:	NORMAN G. GAY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, GUARANTEE COLLECTION COMPANY et al. , Respondents. The initial treating psychiatrist, Robert P. Sedgwick, M. D. , indicated in his report of January 9, 1976, that Gay was 'psychologically disturbed. 'Dr. Sedgwick pointed out, however, that Gay had 'similar symptoms' prior to employment at Guarantee and that Gay had said that he felt subject to a series of persecutions since 1967. Gay suffers a psychiatric disability characterized by a schizoid personality with passive-aggressive features which antedated his current illness of longstanding duration. Respondent employers point out Dr. Naftulin expressed the opinion that Gay had psychiatric symptomatology prior to employment at Guarantee Collection.
Note:	Dr's report must demonstrate legal basis for apportionment under principle of reasonable medical probability.
Citation:	96 CA 3d 555, 44 CCC 817
WCC Citation:	WCC 28451979 CA

Case Name:	Gaytan vs. WCAB		05/28/2003
Summary:	Gaytan petitioned for reconsideration and the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) agreed that medical records can be addressed in supplemental reports, and Dr. Ainbinder's report as qualified medical evaluator was admissible. Even if the presumption remained with Dr. Heskiaoff, Gaytan argues further, the WCAB should have remanded the matter for consideration of Dr. Ainbinder's newly admitted report. Gaytan petitioned for reconsideration with the WCAB. Gaytan contends further that it was prejudicial error for the WCAB to affirm without remanding for the WCJ to consider Dr. Ainbinder's newly admitted report and his opinion as a whole. Tenet Applies The WCJ and WCAB concluded that Tenet applies because Dr. Heskiaoff as the primary treating physician discharged Gaytan from doctor-involved care prior to treatment prescribed by Dr. Ainbinder.
Note:	QME may be PTP after compliance with 4061, 4062, but disputes must be resolved per Reg 9785 before presumption apply.
Citation:	109 Cal.App.4th 200
WCC Citation:	WCC 29352003 CA

Case Name:	Gee vs. WCAB, Lucky Stores		03/22/2002
Summary:	SHELLY GEE, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, LUCKY STORES, et al. , Respondents. Hanna, Brophy, McLean, McAleer & Jensen and Sherry L. Newton, for Respondents Lucky Stores and Kemper National Insurance Company. - Shelly Gee (Gee) petitions this court by a writ of review challenging the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Gee worked as a supermarket clerk for Lucky Stores, Inc. (Lucky) when she filed three separate workers' compensation claims alleging work-related injuries to her head, neck, shoulders, wrists, and upper extremities. Lucky also objected to admitting Dr. Rhoades's medical reports, claiming he inappropriately treated Gee after first serving as her QME.
Note:	PTP presumption need not be formally raised; it applies if facts support application.
Citation:	96 Cal.App.4th 1418
WCC Citation:	WCC 28422002 CA

Case Name:	Gelfo v. Lockheed Martin Corp.		06/02/2006
Summary:	CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION SUMMARY Appellant Charles Gelfo sued his former employer, respondent Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, a division of Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed), alleging disability discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), (Gov. Code, § 12940, subds. Throughout his employment, Gelfo belonged to a labor union that was party to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with Lockheed. Gelfo said Lockheed was misinformed about his medical restrictions, and reiterated he had successfully completed the training without incident. Gelfo was laid-off from his position as a metal fitter in October 2000 as part of a reduction in force at Lockheed. Because Gelfo ceased being a Lockheed employee in October 2000, his claim for wrongful discharge, filed nearly two and one-half years later, was untimely.
Note:	Failure to accommodate or engage in interactive process following work injury where employer does not consider employee 'actually disabled' is violation of FEHA.
Citation:	140 Cal. App. 4th 34
WCC Citation:	WCC 31622006 CA

Case Name:	Gelson's Markets, Inc. v. WCAB (Fowler)		11/13/2009
Summary:	In making this determination, the WCAB did not apply the standard established by the California Supreme Court in Department of Rehabilitation v. Workers' Comp. The WCAB award finding Gelson's liable for discrimination pursuant to section 132a must therefore be annulled. The WCAB granted reconsideration to address the period of lost wages, and issued a decision on June 2, 2008. The WCAB amended the award to provide for reimbursement of lost wages for July 20, 2005, through January 6, 2007. Therefore the WCAB award in favor of Fowler and his attorneys and against Gelson's should be annulled.
Note:	The appropriate standard for determining discrimination against a industrially-injured worker is that set out by the Supreme Court in Rehabilitation v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1281 (Lauher).
Citation:	B209336
WCC Citation:	WCC 35782009 CA

Case Name:	General Casualty et. al., etc. vs. WCAB, CIGA		10/20/2004
Summary:	GENERAL CASUALTY INSURANCE et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and THE CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, Respondents. COUNSEL Hogarth & Associates and Larry D. Hogarth; Benedon & Serlin, Douglas G. Benedon and Gerald M. Serlin for Petitioners General Casualty Insurance and Regent Insurance. Casualty claimed CIGA is an insurer of insolvency, and thus an insurer under Ins. Since CIGA received premium, the WCAB's decision gives CIGA a windfall while Assurance is doubly burdened. General Casualty Insurance (Casualty), a workers' compensation insurer of a special employer of industrially injured special employees provided by RemedyTemp, joined the proceedings.
Note:	Where the workers' compensation carrier for the general employer has become insolvent, and where there are no specific exclusions from the workers' compensation policy of the special employer, the policy provided by the insurer of the special employer constitutes
Citation:	123 Cal. App. 4th 202
WCC Citation:	WCC 30332004 CA

Case Name:	General Casualty Ins. v. WCAB		07/25/2005
Summary:	Hogarth & Associates and Larry D. Hogarth; Benedon & Serlin, Douglas G. Benedon and Gerald M. Serlin for Petitioners General Casualty Insurance and Regent Insurance. RemedyTemp, Jacuzzi, Assurance and Casualty petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration. The WCAB explained that general and special employers are jointly and severally liable to special employees for workers' compensation under Kowalski and McFarland. Code section 11663, Casualty argues that CIGA is an insurer for insolvency, and the statute applies broadly between insurers including CIGA. General Casualty Insurance (Casualty), a workers' compensation insurer of a special employer with an industrially injured special employee provided by RemedyTemp, joined the proceedings.
Note:	Policy not intended to extend to special coverage employees is not considered
Citation:	131 Cal. App. 4th 345; 31 Cal. Rptr. 3d 740
WCC Citation:	WCC 31072005 CA

Case Name:	General Foundry Service vs. WCAB (Jackson)		08/04/1986
Summary:	GENERAL FOUNDRY SERVICE et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, WILLIAM EDWIN JACKSON et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Reynoso, J. , expressing the unanimous view of the court. )I. Jackson worked as a molder for General Foundry Service (General) for 29 years from 1952 to 1981. General has not provided Jackson with work within his capabilities and he remains unemployed. On petition for reconsideration, however, the judge decided that Jackson's disease was not stationary for a permanent disability rating. In addition, he emphasizes that General did not demonstrate that he was capable of obtaining any other work within his capabilities.
Note:	In cases of insidious, progressive diseases, the Board may tentatively rate the disability and reserve jurisdiction until P&S or until the permanent disability is 100%.
Citation:	42 Cal.3d 331; 51 CCC 375
WCC Citation:	WCC 29471986 CA

Case Name:	General Ins. Co. of America v. WCAB		04/07/1980
Summary:	GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and GLEN A. OPINION LILLIE, ACTING P. J. Petitioner General Insurance Company of America (General) is one of several insurance carriers for the employer in the subject workers' compensation proceeding before respondent Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board). We also annul the Board's order directing General to administer the award as it was based upon the refusal to grant reconsideration in favor of General. (Coltharp) (1973) 35 Cal. App. 3d 329 [110 Cal. Rptr. 780]; Ferguson v. City of Oxnard (WCAB en banc opinion, 1970) 35 Cal. Comp. Cases 452. )General then sought reconsideration contending the Board erred in finding General primarily liable and failing to make a final determination on the issue of apportionment between the various injuries.
Note:	Where liability of 4 different insurers is interwoven, 2 filed for reconsideration, all 4 must be heard.
Citation:	104 Cal.App.3d 278, 45 CCC 403
WCC Citation:	WCC 26581980 CA

Case Name:	General Reinsurance Corp. v. St. Jude Hospital		03/26/2003
Summary:	GENERAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. ST. JUDE HOSPITAL, Defendant and Appellant. The General Reinsurance policy provides St. Jude indemnification for losses over $300,000 and defines a "loss" as "amounts actually paid by the Insured as a self-insurer under the Workers Compensation Law. "St. Jude presented testimony of its workers' compensation claims manager that in her experience section 5814 awards were very common and she "reasonably believed" they were covered by the General Reinsurance policy. The claims manager was not employed by St. Jude when the General Reinsurance policy was purchased. General Reinsurance is not obligated to indemnify St. Jude for payments made by St. Jude in excess of regular workers' compensation benefits required because St. Jude violated or failed to comply with the workers' compensation law.
Note:	Self insured employer's excess carrier not required to reimburse for penalties caused by employer's claims practices.
Citation:	107 Cal.App.4th 1097
WCC Citation:	WCC 29272003 CA

Case Name:	Genlyte Group, Inc. v. WCAB		01/03/2008
Summary:	Proceedings Before the Administrative Law Judge and the WCAB Zavala and Genlyte proceeded to trial before the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). (Genlyte had argued under the new schedule Zavala's adjusted permanent disability was either 6 percent or 12 percent. )The WCAB adopted the WCJ's decision and report and denied Genlyte reconsideration on February 27, 2007. Genlyte also insists the WCAB erred in denying its request for credit for its overpayments to Zavala. (2007) 40 Cal. 4th 1313, 1331 (Brodie) [WCAB "has extensive expertise in interpreting and applying the workers' compensation scheme"]; Ralphs Grocery Co. v. Workers' Comp.
Note:	Neither the statutory language or the legislative history of Labor Code section 4660 (d) indicates that a comprehensive medical-legal report or treating physician's report state the injured worker's condition has reached permanent and stationary status to indicate the existence of permanent disability.
Citation:	158 Cal.App.4th 705
WCC Citation:	WCC 32962008 CA

Case Name:	Germann v. WCAB		09/22/1981
Summary:	Germann contends applicant was not his employee but an independent contractor and therefore Germann is not liable for payment to applicant for workers' compensation benefits. Rodriguez gave Germann a list of contractors and Germann looked up others in the 'yellow pages. 'Although Germann was present when applicant was doing the work, Germann at no time told applicant how to do the job. Germann would carry lumber and applicant acknowledged that on occasion applicant told Germann what lumber to carry and where to carry it. Applicant charged Germann an hourly wage higher than union scale as Germann was not paying 'health and welfare or vacation. '
Note:	Employer did not control manner or results of work done by employee.
Citation:	123 Cal.App.3d 776, 46 CCC 1062
WCC Citation:	WCC 25861981 CA

Case Name:	Gerson v. Industrial Accident Commission		02/01/1961
Summary:	DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO No. 24972 February 1, 1961 ANNA GERSON, PETITIONER, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION ET AL. , RESPONDENTS PROCEEDING to review part of an order of the Industrial Accident Commission directing that amount of employee's self-procured medical and hospital expenses be paid to her health insurer. By its findings of fact the commission found that Blue Cross was not entitled to a lien and by its award denied that lien. Section 4903, so far as pertinent reads: "The commission may determine, and allow as a lien against any amount to be paid as compensation: . 5300: "All the following proceedings shall be instituted before the commission and not elsewhere, except as otherwise provided in Division 4. (f) For the determination of any other matter, jurisdiction over which is vested by Division 4 in the commission. "
Note:	Commission has no jurisdiction to grant health care provider a portion of an award where commission has denied existence of a lien.
Citation:	188 Cal. App. 2d 735
WCC Citation:	WCC 30931961 CA

Case Name:	Gholipour v. Superior Court of San Diego County		10/24/2017
Summary:	Filed 10/24/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             GOLNAZ GHOLIPOUR, Petitioner, .             v. .             THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Respondent; .             THE PEOPLE, Real Party in Interest .             D072235 .             (Super. .             John O'Connell, San Diego County Primary Public Defender and Randy Mize, Deputy Public Defender, for Petitioner. .           Bonnie M. Dumanis, San Diego County District Attorney, Mark A. Amador and Samantha Begovich, Deputy District Attorneys, for Real Party in Interest. .           Following issuance of our remittitur, Gholipour moved in the trial court for an order directing that the amount of her restitution be determined by the Orange County Superior Court. .           WE CONCUR: .           McCONNELL, P. J.
Note:	In a case of first impression, a California appellate court ruled that a San Diego trial judge retained jurisdiction to enter a restitution order against an injured worker who had relocated to Orange County after serving three years in custody for workers’ compensation fraud.
Citation:	D072235
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. SCD246831

Case Name:	Gibbs v. American Airlines, Inc.		08/10/1999
Summary:	1 Appellant Gibbs worked at respondent American Airlines, Inc. (American Airlines) from 1989 to 1995. Gibbs was a service representative in the Admiral's Club at the San Francisco airport in her last few years at American Airlines. Gibbs resigned from American Airlines after her supervisors criticized her performance and attendance following four days' absence on sick leave in April 1995. Gibbs testified that she telephoned American Airlines during her days off and told someone that she would be out through April 14. Gibbs was diagnosed with fibromyalgia in July 1995, almost three months after leaving American Airlines.
Note:	Secured compensation presumed in cases of employment relationship and work-related injury.
Citation:	74 Cal.App.4th 1, 64 CCC 1001
WCC Citation:	WCC 24281999 CA

Case Name:	Gil v. WCAB		10/25/1996
Summary:	Anita Gil, Petitioner v. Workers Compensation Appeals Board, Sees Candies, Cypress Insurance Company, Respondents. Sees Candies, Cypress Insurance Company, Petitioners v. Workers Compensation Appeals Board, Anita Gil, Respondents. Applicant Anita Gil worked for employer/Defendant See's Candies as a seasonal worker and janitor. The WCJ computed Applicant's temporary disability rate based on her actual wages during her on season with Defendant. The Board found that the WCJ should not have included unemployment compensation in computing Applicant's TD during her off season. You are counseled to consult the full case for an accurate citation.
Note:	Off season AWW may be calculated by dividing annual wages by 52 weeks excluding unemployment.
Citation:	61 CCC 1300 (Writ Denied)
WCC Citation:	WCC 28821996 CA

Case Name:	Gillette v. WCAB		09/29/1971
Summary:	ROBERT R. GILLETTE, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CITY OF WOODLAND et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Pierce, J. , with Friedman, Acting P. J. , and Janes, J. , concurring. )In that order the board found and held that applicant Robert R. Gillette 'did not sustain injury arising out of and occurring in the course of his employment. 'Woodland's fire department, described as being 'medium-sized,' is one in which both regular firemen and the captain do actual fire fighting. In September, 1968, while engaged in extinguishing a garage fire, he had a severe chest pain and nausea upon finishing this activity. The Board found that the WCJ should not have included unemployment compensation in computing Applicant's TD during her off season.
Note:	Firefighter's heart attack determined within scope of employment.
Citation:	20 Cal.App.3d 312, 36 CCC 570
WCC Citation:	WCC 25971971 CA

Case Name:	Gin v. Pennsylvania Life Insurance Co.		12/09/2005
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO No. A109541 December 9, 2005 KIMBERLY GIN, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. PENNSYLVANIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. The superior court granted summary judgment to the insurance carrier, Pennsylvania Life Insurance Company (Penn Life), holding that appellant Kimberly Gin's disability was not the result of an "accidental bodily injury" and thus not covered under the policy. On September 13, 1996, Gin applied for a disability insurance policy from Penn Life. Gin made a claim for disability benefits to Penn Life on October 10, 1996. Gin sued Penn Life for breach of contract in the Alameda County Superior Court on March 15, 2001.
Note:	Carpal tunnel syndrome not deemed 'accidental bodily injury' under insurance policy.
Citation:	134 Cal. App. 4th 939
WCC Citation:	WCC 31312005 CA

Case Name:	Glass Containers, Inc. v. IAC		12/03/1953
Summary:	GLASS CONTAINERS, INC. (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and ELIZABETH B. HART et al. , Respondents. The commission thereafter made the award here attacked in favor of Industrial and against petitioner for a portion of the total liability. It is petitioner's position that the commission is without jurisdiction to make such an award. Industrial conceives itself to be a 'third person' in whose favor a liability is imposed for compensation by 'this division' (Lab. [121 Cal. App. 2d 660] Section 4903 imposes certain liens which the commission may allow 'against any amount to be paid as compensation. '
Note:	Liens allowed for advances of credit for nec. living expenses, not for satisfying a contractual debt.
Citation:	121 Cal.App.2d 656, 18 CCC 305
WCC Citation:	WCC 25011953 CA

Case Name:	Globe Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission		11/26/1934
Summary:	November 26, 1934 GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY (A CORPORATION), PETITIONER, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION AND ALOYSIUS MARMUROWICZ, RESPONDENTS. PROCEEDING to review an order of the Industrial Accident Commission awarding compensation for personal injuries. In the course of the argument Miss Marshall told Marmurowicz to "shut up" and then referred to him as a "dirty Polack". Again, in Globe Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Acc. (Globe Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Acc.
Note:	Claimant entitled to benefits for injury caused by assault if traceable to incident of employment.
Citation:	2 Cal. 2d 8
WCC Citation:	WCC 31121934 CA

Case Name:	Go v. Sutter Solano Medical Center		09/25/2017
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD  STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             BELINDA GO, Appllcant, .             v. .             SUTTER SOLANO MEDICAL CENTER, permissibly self-insured, Defendant. .             Case No. ADJ10168011 (San Francisco District Office) .             OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION .             Applicant admittedly ·sustained industrial injury to her neck while working for defendant as a registered nurse on June 9, 2013. .             The WCJ provided a Report & Recommendation On Petition For Reconsideration (Report) recommending that reconsideration be denied. .           WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD .           JOSE H. RAZO .           I CONCUR, .           FRANK M. BRASS .           KATHERINE ZALEWSKI .           DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA .           SEP 2 5 2017 Rule 10848 provides as follows: "When a petition for reconsideration, removal or disqualification has been timely filed, supplemental petitions or pleadings or responses either than the answer shall be considered only when specifically requested or approved by the Appeals Board. "Â
Note:
Citation:	ADJ10168011
WCC Citation:	ADJ10168011

Case Name:	Go v. Zimpel		04/18/2017
Summary:	.             A144806 .             (Contra Costa County Super. Go sued Gary Zimpel and Zimpel’s employer, Contra Costa County (County),1 for damages related to the car accident. Zimpel failed to stop and rear-ended the postal truck, which was “pushed into” Go’s sedan. According to Zimpel, he was driving at 10 to 15 miles per hour before the collision, and “the impact of the collision was minor. ” Neither Zimpel, his passenger, nor the driver of the postal truck was injured in the collision. .           We concur: .           _________________________ Richman, Acting P. J. .           _________________________ Stewart, J.
Note:
Citation:	A144806
WCC Citation:	Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. C12-00363

Case Name:	Godinez vs. Buffets, Inc.; SRS		10/04/2004
Summary:	As noted above, the RU issued its determination on July 17, 2003. Defendant filed an appeal (which was served on applicant's attorney) at the District Office that was stamped: "DWC/WCAB-RECD/Filed Aug 05 2003-San Jose. "For this reason, and cognizant of public policy in favor of hearing cases on their merits (Litzmann v. Workers' Comp. Nevertheless, there remains a question as to what "timely" means when the statutory definition of "timely" has been repealed. In 2004, former section 139. 5 was re-enacted, with modifications, to apply to injuries occurring before January 1, 2004 (2004 ch.
Note:	Timeliness of voc rehab appeal for injuries prior to 1/1/04 governed by former Labor Code section 4645(d).
Citation:	69 CCC 1311; Panel
WCC Citation:	WCC 30632004 CA

Case Name:	Golchini v. State		02/28/2012
Summary:	GOLCHINI v. STATE HASSAN GOLCHINI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR, et al. , Defendants and Respondents. When Golchini began to "speak up" about the matter in December 2005, he allegedly found himself in a "hostile environment. "On March 14, 2008, at a hearing at which Golchini did not appear, he was expelled from the university. CSU is a state government entity, and to the extent Golchini seeks to hold CSU liable for damages, he must allege compliance with the claims presentation requirement of the Tort Claims Act. The second amended complaint does not mention section 1983, and Golchini did not raise this argument in the trial court.
Note:	The exclusive remedy of workers' compensation barred a student librarian's suit against the Board of Trustees of California State University.
Citation:	A129409
WCC Citation:	WCC 386329012 CA

Case Name:	Gold v. City of San Diego		09/03/2009
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA STEVEN GOLD, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO, Defendant and Appellant. Ct. No. No. 37-2007-00073294-CU-WM-CTL) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Joan M. Lewis, Judge. The City of San Diego (City) denied city employee Steven Gold's request for an industrial leave benefit after he injured his back on the job. Background Gold has been employed by the City as a deputy city attorney since 1988. In opposition, the City asserted the hearing officer properly rejected Gold's claim because Gold never filed a written report for the 1992 injury.
Note:	[Unpublished] Because there is no requirement that a preexisting injury be documented in a written report to qualify it as service connected, and based on the showing that claimant's 2005 injury was an aggravation of a preexisting back condition that was work related and not the result of a congenital condition, claimant is entitled to the industrial leave benefit.
Citation:	D053367
WCC Citation:	WCC 35602009 CA

Case Name:	Goler v. W&J Sloane Co. (WCAB En Banc)		12/07/1979
Summary:	The Workers' Compensation Judge allowed an attorney fee of $ 5,000 to the law firm of Bryan and Etting, petitioners herein. Section 10775 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board provides as follows: '§ 10775. 'For many years, the 'rule of thumb' has been that attorney fees should approximate 10% of the award or compromise and release. The Board will therefore affirm the workers' compensation judge's finding that $ 5,000 represents a reasonable fee for applicant's attorney's services. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD Melvin S. Witt, Chairman John F. Dunlap Gordon R. Gaines Mervin N. Glow H. J. Martin C. L. Swezey Robert E. Burton
Note:	Complexity determination for awarding attorney fee in 100% PD cases; 621.25 week limit, WCJ discretion.
Citation:	44 CCC 1065
WCC Citation:	WCC 27131979 CA

Case Name:	Gomez v. LA County Employees Retirement Assn.		09/25/2012
Summary:	GOMEZ v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSN. RICHARD GOMEZ, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Appellant. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS SUZUKAWA, J. Appellant Los Angeles County Employees' Retirement Association (LACERA) appeals from a judgment granting respondent Richard Gomez's petition for a writ of mandate. It entered a judgment directing LACERA to vacate its prior decision and to enter a new decision granting Gomez a service-connected disability retirement. BACKGROUND In October 1989, Gomez was hired as a deputy sheriff by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
Note:	A former deputy sheriff with a history of on-duty back injuries and an aggressive tumor in his spine was not entitled to service-connected disability retirement benefits.
Citation:	B237426
WCC Citation:	WCC 39342012 CA

Case Name:	Gomez v. Sharon Baptist Bd. of Directors, Inc.		10/28/2008
Summary:	Gomez v Sharon Baptist Bd. 23476/04 84824/05 [*1]Geraldo Gomez, et al. , Plaintiffs, v Sharon Baptist Board of Directors, Inc. , Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, S. M. Construction Co. , Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. ), entered February 27, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, denied the cross motion of defendant/third-party plaintiff Sharon Baptist Board of Directors, Inc. (Sharon Baptist) for summary judgment on its claim for contractual indemnification against third-party defendant S. M. Construction Co. (SMC), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Plaintiff Gomez, an employee of SMC, was injured as a result of falling from a scaffold that shifted as he performed SMC's work on premises owned by Sharon Baptist. Supreme Court correctly denied Sharon Baptist summary judgment against SMC based in its indemnification claim.
Note:	There has been no finding that either SMC or its agents were negligent let alone that such negligence proximately caused plaintiff's injuries. Accordingly, summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim is premature.
Citation:	4229 23476/04 84824/05
WCC Citation:	WCC 34412008 CA

Case Name:	Gomez vs. Casa Sandoval; Nokes vs. Placer Savings		05/27/2003
Summary:	OAK 234515; OAK 239085; OAK 240882 CAROL NOKES, Applicant, VS. PLACER SAVINGS BANK; FREMONT COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY; PAULA INSURANCE COMPANY (IN LIQUIDATION); CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION (IN LIQUIDATION); CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION; DEFENDANTS. SAC 289506; SAC 289507 The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) granted reconsideration to further study the record in these two cases. "Case OAK 234515 for cumulative trauma period from August 1988 to December 8, 1995, wherein California Compensation/CIGA is the only defendant. Since the apportionment of liability has been reduced to a final judgment, CIGA remains liable for the now-insolvent carrier's already-established liability. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, as the Decision After Reconsideration of the Board (En Banc) in Nokes v. Placer Savings Bank (SAC 289506, 289507), that the Findings, Award and Order of July 24, 2002 is hereby AFFIRMED.
Note:	Limitations on CIGA liability where mix of solvent and insolvent carriers.
Citation:	68 CCC (2003) (En Banc)
WCC Citation:	WCC 29362003 CA

Case Name:	Goni Enterprises v. Dept. of Industrial Relations		04/10/2018
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 THREE .             GONI ENTERPRISES, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT, Defendant and Respondent. .             B277670 .             Los Angeles County Super. .             California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement and Edna Garcia Earley for Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION .             In November 2013, the Office of the State Labor Commissioner (Commissioner) within the California Department of Industrial Relations (Department) cited plaintiff Goni Enterprises, Inc. (Goni) for failing to secure workers’ compensation insurance for its employees. .           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS .           LAVIN, J.
Note:	A California Appellate Court ruled that an employer could not challenge a lien against its property, imposed because of failure to secure workers’ compensation insurance for its employees, since it had not followed the proper process to challenge a stop order and penalty assessment.
Citation:	B277670
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NC059643

Case Name:	Gonzales v. WCAB		12/22/1998
Summary:	CONNIE GONZALES, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HUNT-WESSON, INC. , Respondents. She petitioned this court for a writ of review of the board's decision [68 Cal. App. 4th 846] on this narrow legal issue. She stipulated she did not have any plans to look for work elsewhere once retired from the employ of Hunt-Wesson, Inc. The referee issued a report finding the petitioner's average weekly earnings for purposes of temporary disability were zero after August 10. 'Average weekly earnings' are determined for both temporary and permanent disability payments according to various provisions of section 4453.
Note:	Worker not entitled to TTD after date of retirement because no earning capacity.
Citation:	68 Cal.App.4th 843, 63 CCC 1477
WCC Citation:	WCC 24891998 CA

Case Name:	Gonzalez v. ATI Systems International		05/20/2011
Summary:	GONZALEZ v. ATI SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. ROLAND GONZALEZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ATI SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. On September 15, 2005, Gonzalez provided ATI with a note from his doctor stating, "Roland Gonzalez is under my care for a serious cardiovascular condition and is temporarily disabled. ATI stated that it had no information as to when, or even if, Gonzalez would be able to return to work. ATI argued that Gonzalez never gave notice that he was eligible to return to work under certain circumstances, and therefore, ATI was not required to engage in an interactive process. In this case, ATI presented evidence that granting Gonzalez an additional unpaid leave of absence would have caused ATI undue hardship.
Note:	An accountant who was fired after he used all the 12 weeks of unpaid leave allowed to him while recovering from a surgery has a valid discrimination claim that should go to trial, the California 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	B223779
WCC Citation:	WCC 37642011 CA

Case Name:	Gonzalez v. Luzaich Striping, Inc.		04/10/2008
Summary:	INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Ruben Gonzalez appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendants Luzaich Striping, Inc. and Bruce Freebury (jointly LSI). Freebury personally informed Gonzalez that he was being laid off, and told Gonzalez that he was being let go because "work was slow. "Freebury did not give Gonzalez his final paycheck at the time he informed Gonzalez he was being dismissed. After Gonzalez filed this lawsuit, Luzaich asked an office assistant to prepare a worksheet setting forth Gonzalez's absences during his employment with LSI. Luzaich also offered a "worksheet that [he] had prepared after Mr. Gonzalez presented his claim in this matter" that Luzaich believed "confirmed [his] understanding upon laying [Gonzalez] off that he had a poor attendance record. "
Note:	[Unpublished] Plaintiff does not claim on appeal that he was improperly terminated because of his alleged disability. Rather, plaintiff contends that it is employer's failure to rehire and/or failure to accommodate him in the rehiring process that represents the actionable disability discrimination. This argument is meritless.
Citation:	D050693
WCC Citation:	WCC 33392008 CA

Case Name:	Gonzalez v. WCAB (Hunt Wesson)		12/22/1998
Summary:	She petitioned this court for a writ of review of the board's decision [68 Cal. App. 4th 846] on this narrow legal issue. She stipulated she did not have any plans to look for work elsewhere once retired from the employ of Hunt-Wesson, Inc. The referee issued a report finding the petitioner's average weekly earnings for purposes of temporary disability were zero after August 10. 'Average weekly earnings' are determined for both temporary and permanent disability payments according to various provisions of section 4453. (1947) 79 Cal. App. 2d 711, 722 [180 P. 2d 972] [earning capacity is 'touchstone' in determining average earnings]. )
Note:	Applicant not entitled to TTD after date of retirement (NOTE: distinguishing cases cited within opinion).
Citation:	68 Cal.App.4th 843
WCC Citation:	WCC 28191998 CA

Case Name:	Gordon v. Symantec Corp.		10/17/2011
Summary:	INTRODUCTION Appellant Sarah Gordon was employed by respondent Symantec Corporation (Symantec) from 2004 until November 2007, when she was terminated from her position as senior principal engineer. Gordon filed a wrongful termination action against Symantec alleging that Symantec's decision to terminate her was based upon her physical disability, which Symantec had accommodated by allowing her to fly business class on flights longer than three hours. For the reasons stated below, we determine that Symantec met its burden on summary judgment to show legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for terminating Gordon. Gordon continued to work for Symantec as a contractor until 2004, when she accepted Weafer's offer of employment with Symantec as a senior principal research engineer. While working for Symantec as an employee and as a contractor, Gordon lived in Florida and worked from her home.
Note:	A disabled senior principal research engineer did not present enough evidence for a court to conclude that her employer terminated her because of her disability.
Citation:	H036239
WCC Citation:	WCC 38112011 CA

Case Name:	Gorman v. WCAB		07/19/1982
Summary:	RICHARD GORMAN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE et al. , Respondents. Richard Gorman (petitioner) was employed as a police officer by the City of San Clemente from 1973 through May 23, 1979. It was adjudicated in 1980 that petitioner had suffered several industrial injuries resulting in permanent partial disability. The Rehabilitation Bureau ordered the defendants to pay temporary disability indemnity pursuant to subdivision (c) of section 139. 5. Defendants appealed to the Board, and both the WCAB trial judge and the Board ruled that the petitioner's right to temporary disability benefits under the Workers' Compensation Act terminated pursuant to section 4853 fn.
Note:	Retired policeman not eligible to continue receiving rehab. TD indemnity.
Citation:	133 Cal.App.3d 998, 47 CCC 745
WCC Citation:	WCC 27031982 CA

Case Name:	Gourley v. City of Napa		03/18/1975
Summary:	OSMER B. GOURLEY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CITY OF NAPA, Defendant and Respondent (Opinion by Taylor, P. J. , with Kane and Rouse, JJ. , concurring. )Richard L. Knickerbocker, City Attorney (Santa Monica), Rosario Perry, Deputy City Attorney, Chalmers E. Lones, City Attorney (Signal Hill), Warren J. Lynch, City Attorney (Salinas), and Raymond M. Haight, Assistant City Attorney, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent. Pursuant to this statute, the temporary disability payments that would otherwise have been payable to Gourley by the city's workmen's compensation insurer were paid to the city. Upon receipt of this notification, the city terminated payments to Gourley under Labor Code section 4850 and applied to the PERS for disability retirement of Gourley to be effective July 1, 1972. On July 11, 1972, Gourley's attorney wrote to PERS stating that Gourley did not consent to the retirement date sought by the city.
Note:	Fireman cannot be retired with PD benefits and still be receiving full salary with leave of absence.
Citation:	48 Cal.App.3d 156, 40 CCC 888
WCC Citation:	WCC 26901975 CA

Case Name:	Government Code 31720.7 - Blood Borne Disease		12/27/2001
Summary:	The disease so developing or manifesting itself in those cases shall in no case be attributed to any disease existing prior to that development or manifestation. (b) Any safety member, firefighter, county probation officer, or member active in law enforcement described in subdivision (a) permanently incapacitated for the performance of duty as a result of a blood-borne infectious disease shall receive a service-connected disability retirement. (c) The presumption described in subdivision (a) is rebuttable by other evidence. Unless so rebutted, the board is bound to find in accordance with the presumption. (d) -Blood-borne infectious disease,-for purposes of this section, means a disease caused by exposure to pathogenic microorganisms that are present in human blood that can cause disease in humans, including, but not limited to, those pathogenic microorganisms defined as blood-borne pathogens by the Department of Industrial Relations.
Note:	Presumption of industrial causation of blood-borne infectious disease.
Citation:	Gov Code 31720.7
WCC Citation:	WCC 28302001 CA

Case Name:	Graczyk v. WCAB		08/08/1986
Summary:	RICKY D. GRACZYK, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FULLERTON et al. , Respondents. The Board granted reconsideration and found (in a two-to-one decision) that applicant was not an employee of CSUF. Com. , supra, 219 Cal. App. 2d 457, and hence he could not be deprived of it retroactively by the Legislature's 1981 amendment to section 3352. To determine whether applicant had a vested right of action, we must look to the unique nature of the workers' compensation law in California. Workers' Compensation Practice (Cont. Ed. Bar 1985) § 1. 3, p. 4; see Lowman v. Stafford (1964) 226 Cal. App. 2d 31, 36 [37 Cal. Rptr.
Note:	Scholarship athletes are not employees; applies retroactively.
Citation:	184 Cal.App.3d 997, 51 CCC 408
WCC Citation:	WCC 24351986 CA

Case Name:	Gradle vs. Doppelmayer USA		02/27/2004
Summary:	RONALD MICHAEL GRADLE et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. DOPPELMAYR USA, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. A mechanic asked Gradle if he wanted the lift stopped and Gradle said no. Gradle climbed into the operator shack at the terminal. Gradle yelled to the mechanic, who was 20 feet away, to take the lift to start speed and then stop it. Gradle squatted on top of the tub wall waiting for the lift to stop and slipped. Gradle testified the maintenance mechanic smelled "boozy" and appeared a little hung over the morning of the accident.
Note:	Cal-OSHA standards admissible to prove negligence per se against third party.
Citation:	116 Cal.App.4th 276
WCC Citation:	WCC 29722004 CA

Case Name:	Graham vs. WCAB		05/12/1989
Summary:	In July 1983, Graham filed an application with the Board for the adjudication of his claim for medical treatment and permanent disability benefits. Graham also filed a civil action against Dr. Peter Macs (later amended to the Estate of Macs) seeking damages for medical malpractice in Dr. Macs's treatment of Graham for the injuries he sustained in the bus accident. The Transit District then petitioned for credit, in the amount of the settlement, against the Transit District's liability for future workers' compensation payments to Graham. Graham filed a petition for reconsideration with the Board on the ground that the malpractice settlement was not subject to credit. 5 [2b] Graham counters that the conditions for invoking the statute were met in this case where counsel acknowledged in settlement discussions that Graham was entitled to workers' compensation benefits and did not include such benefits in computing the settlement.
Note:	Employer entitled to credit if the medical malpractice settlement does not consider workers' compensation benefits in arriving at the result.
Citation:	210 CA3d 499
WCC Citation:	WCC 30191989 CA

Case Name:	Granado vs. WCAB		10/04/1968
Summary:	HENRY GRANADO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, HASLETT WAREHOUSE et al. , Respondents. The board's position is that this rule should be applied to temporary disability cases. Thus we were not directly confronted with the question whether temporary disability may be apportioned as between industrial and nonindustrial injuries. There is a substantial difference between the rules governing apportionment between industrial injuries and those governing apportionment between industrial and nonindustrial injuries. We thus need not consider reports other than Dr. McIvor's, including one that the entire disability was due to the preexisting nonindustrial condition.
Note:	Temporary disability is not apportionable.
Citation:	69 Cal.2d 399
WCC Citation:	WCC 29581968 CA

Case Name:	Graphic Arts Mutual Ins. Co. v. Time Travel Internat., Inc.		02/02/2005
Summary:	GRAPHIC ARTS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TIME TRAVEL INTERNATIONAL, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. Because we find that plaintiff and appellant Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance Company may proceed in superior court, we reverse the judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend. From September 15, 1993 through September 15, 1994, appellant insured defendant and respondent Time Travel International, Inc. , for workers' compensation benefits. DISCUSSION Appellant contends the trial court has jurisdiction over its complaint for indemnity against respondent pursuant to section 5500. 5, subdivision (a). Lungren v. Superior Court (1996) 14 Cal. 4th 294, 300; Moore v. Regents of University of California (1990) 51 Cal. 3d 120, 125. )
Note:	WCAB does not have exclusive jurisdiction in a carrier's action against an uninsured employer in a CT reimbursement claim.
Citation:	126 Cal. App. 4th 405
WCC Citation:	WCC 30762005 CA

Case Name:	Gravelin v. Satterfield		11/15/2011
Summary:	GARY GRAVELIN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PAUL SATTERFIELD et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiff Gary Gravelin, a hired worker, was injured while installing a satellite dish on the roof of a residence. Dish Network outsourced the job to Linkus Enterprises, Inc. , which sent plaintiff Gary Gravelin to perform the installation job. Plaintiff Gravelin testified that the roof extension looked like it was constructed of roofing plywood. Raymond Coolidge did not talk with plaintiff Gravelin when Gravelin arrived to install the satellite dish.
Note:	A trio of homeowners are not liable for a satellite dish installation worker's slip and fall from their roof because they did not owe him a duty.
Citation:	A131333
WCC Citation:	WCC 38262011 CA

Case Name:	Green v. State of California		08/23/2007
Summary:	Ct. No. RCV060816 DWIGHT D. GREEN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant and Appellant. Plaintiff began working for the State of California in 1974. In 1987, plaintiff worked as a stationary engineer for the Department of Corrections at the California Institute for Men in Chino (the Institute). In this case, for example, if because of his hepatitis C plaintiff Dwight Green was unable to perform the essential duties of a stationary engineer at a state prison, defendant State of California did not violate FEHA by terminating him because of his disability. (Sara M. v. Superior Court (2005) 36 Cal. 4th 998, 1012-1014; Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Bd.
Note:	The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that plaintiffs prove they are 'qualified individuals' under the statute, i.e., that they have the ability to perform a job's essential duties before they can prevail in a lawsuit for discrimination...the FEHA requires employees to prove that they are qualified individuals under the statute just as the federal ADA requires.
Citation:	42 Cal. 4th 254
WCC Citation:	WCC 32422007 CA

Case Name:	Green v. WCAB (City of Compton)		03/30/2005
Summary:	City answered that any delay was part of continuous conduct, and, thus, the WCAB correctly awarded a single increase of compensation. Green Petitions for Reconsideration Green petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration. In addition, none of the reporting physicians prior to the agreed medical examiners indicated Green required vocational rehabilitation. On November 3, 2003, the WCAB adopted the WCJ's report and decision, and denied Green reconsideration. Weiss and Fauget, and then again by the Stipulation, the WCAB should have awarded multiple increases in compensation.
Note:	LC 5814 as amended by SB 899 applies retroactively to cases still open as of effective date.
Citation:	127 Cal.App.4th 1426
WCC Citation:	WCC 30902005 CA

Case Name:	Greene v. Countrywide Home Loans		10/29/2007
Summary:	Ct. No. 042760) (Ventura County) Plaintiff, Mercedes Greene, appeals a summary judgment in favor of defendants, Frank Duda, Anne Babb and Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (Countrywide), her former employer, in her wrongful termination, sexual harassment, retaliatory discharge and disability discrimination action. Duda reported receiving this package to Countrywide and made a complaint against Greene because "two of the emails contained death threats. "Countrywide concluded that Greene violated its workplace violence policy and a rule prohibiting employees from using its email system to send "threatening messages. "Greene claimed that in 2002 there were a series of incidents showing a pattern of harassment against her by Duda and Countrywide. She did not consider Greene's gender or any complaint Greene had made against Countrywide in deciding to terminate her employment.
Note:	[Unpublished] The plaintiff did not meet her burden to overcome the defendant-employer's evidence which shows it did not engage in harassment or discrimination and it had legitimate reasons for terminating the plaintiff-employee.
Citation:	B192329
WCC Citation:	WCC 32732007 CA