Case Name:	Spatafore & Wheeler v. WCAB		09/08/1987
Summary:	Spatafore & Wheeler, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California; W. G. Nolan Plastering, Inc. ; and State Compensation Insurance Fund, Respondents. Cases 1065], payable to Spatafore & Wheeler. Permanent disability indemnity in accordance with paragraph 3 above, less the sum of $ 5,000. 00 payable to applicant's attorney as the reasonable value of services rendered and commuted per Goler and paid per [Labor Code section] 4903 to Spatafore & Wheeler . . . Spatafore petitioned for reconsideration of the Board's decision, contending that the reasonable value of Spatafore's services is $ 5,000 and that Spatafore should have been afforded a hearing before the WCJ's commutation order was rescinded. Spatafore appended to its petition a detailed summary of its services performed in obtaining the award.
Note:	Commuting an atty. fee requires a board hearing on 'appropriateness' factors.
Citation:	52 CCC 412
WCC Citation:	WCC 26161987 CA

Case Name:	Spinks v. EQR-Briarwood		10/18/2012
Summary:	According to Brown, Mobile Medical offered to have someone pack up Spinks' belongings and also offered to fly her back to her home in Texas, but Spinks refused. Tauala offered to find an apartment for Spinks but Spinks replied that she had already made a hotel reservation at the Tropicana Lodge in Palo Alto. Tauala also offered to look into obtaining government assistance for Spinks, but Spinks declined that offer. Spinks' mother, who was staying with Spinks after her surgery, was also present in the apartment. (Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood Apartments (2009) 171 Cal. App. 4th 1004, 1057 (Spinks I). )
Note:	A temporary worker who was kicked out of her employer-provided apartment after she could no longer work because of an on-the-job injury had abandoned the property and had no cause of action against her former employer.
Citation:	H036448
WCC Citation:	WCC 39412012 CA

Case Name:	St. Paul Travelers Ins. Co. v. Mark Davis Masonry, Inc.		02/14/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARK DAVIS MASONRY, INC. , Defendant and Appellant. * * * INTRODUCTION St. Paul Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) paid money to settle a personal injury lawsuit. On September 11, 1999, Darren McLaren and Mark Davis, employees of MDM, were injured when scaffolding erected by Waco collapsed. McLaren, Davis, and Davis's wife filed a personal injury action against RAS, Waco, and other subcontractors on May 4, 2000. The trial court also ruled Travelers could recover the attorney fees it incurred in the indemnity case, and invited Travelers to submit a request for those fees.
Note:	[Unpublished] A party seeking nonstatutory costs or expenses (such as expert witness fees) under a contractual prevailing-party attorney fees clause must plead and prove its entitlement to those costs or expenses. Travelers failed to do so.
Citation:	G037661
WCC Citation:	WCC 33172008 CA

Case Name:	Stanley v. Richmond		06/14/1995
Summary:	These claims against respondents Diana Richmond (Richmond or respondent) and her law firm, Richmond & Chamberlin (collectively, hereinafter, respondents), arose out of a dissolution proceeding in which Richmond represented appellant, and C. Rick Chamberlin (Chamberlin), an attorney with whom Richmond was in the process of forming a new law firm, represented appellant's husband, Dr. John Stanley (Dr. Stanley). Later the same day, however, appellant called Richmond back to say she had struck a deal with the Nossaman firm and to propose paying Dr. Stanley "$250,000 via a loan. "Apparently, Chamberlin also informed Richmond that, if appellant obtained a $250,000 bank loan, Dr. Stanley might be willing to take a note from appellant for the $110,000 balance. Stanley further testified that she understood "taking offices together" to mean that Richmond and Chamberlin would be renting space in the same building as Richmond had done with the Nossaman firm but not that they would be starting a new law firm together. She informed Richmond that she considered Dr. Stanley's and Chamberlin's pursuit of the motion to compel sale to be sanctionable in the circumstances, and admonished Richmond to "[b]e an advocate. "
Note:	The appellant established a prima facie case of breach of fiduciary duty, professional negligence, and breach of contract.
Citation:	A062468
WCC Citation:	WCC 37311995 CA

Case Name:	Starving Students Inc vs. Dept of Indust Relations		01/24/2005
Summary:	STARVING STUDENTS, INC. , Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT, Defendant and Respondent. OPINION KRIEGLER, J. - Appellant Starving Students, Inc. (Employer) appeals from a judgment denying its petition for writ of mandate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1094. 5. However, the DLSE presented evidence that Kemper had not agreed to provide coverage to Employer through their policy with Omni. On March 19, 2003, the deputy labor commissioner visited Employer's office and cited Employer for violating the stop work order. [¶] (b) By securing from the Director of Industrial Relations a certificate of consent to self-insure .
Note:	Dept of Labor Stds Enforcement does not have discretion to withdraw penalty assessed against employer insured by unauthorized carrier.
Citation:	125 Cal. App. 4th 1357
WCC Citation:	WCC 30742005 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Fund v. WCAB (Guzman) CA6		01/30/2018
Summary:	State Compensation Fund v. WCAB (Guzman)
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that a construction worker was not entitled to benefits for a psychiatric injury from an accident where his compacter overturned.
Citation:	H044300
WCC Citation:	W.C.A.B. No. ADJ6839277

Case Name:	State Compensation Ins. Fund v. Notis Enterprises		06/07/2010
Summary:	FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY The State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) was created in 1914 to issue workers' compensation policies to employers. The premium for the 2004 policy was calculated by the State Fund to be $497,265. 48. State Fund claims that Notis failed to pay the premium for the 2004 policy. State Fund assigned its claim against Notis to Collecto, Inc. Collecto filed a complaint against Notis for goods and services sold and delivered, account stated, and open book account. Each is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the assignment by State Fund to Collecto, and the reassignment to State Fund. Notis asserts: "Even if the account was properly transferred to Collecto from State Fund, then how is State Fund conducting re-audits of the account on 'March 10, 2008' when it transferred the account in 2006?," citing a declaration by an employee of State Fund filed in the trial court.
Note:	[Unpublished] Discovery order upheld.
Citation:	B213079
WCC Citation:	WCC 36362010 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Ins. Fund v. Zamora		03/21/2011
Summary:	STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND v. NANCY H. ZAMORA No. 10-796. Supreme Court of United States. March 21, 2011. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Note:	The U.S. Supreme Court will not review a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that allowed a bankruptcy trustee to recoup a $101,531 restitution payment made to State Compensation Insurance Fund.
Citation:	10-796
WCC Citation:	WCC 37332011 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Sana Khan		01/27/2018
Summary:	  Plaintiff-Appellant State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendants-Appellees. Specifically, State Fund had the opportunity to be heard regarding the validity of the 2009 Settlement before the arbitrator and decided to negotiate the superseding 2010 Settlements instead. State Fund had the opportunity to investigate the fraudulence of the Zaks Entities’ billings before entering into the 2010 Settlements and did so in depth, with the help of outside counsel. State Fund then had the opportunity to contest the fairness of the 2010 Settlements before the     arbitrator as well, and did not.   Finally, State Fund failed to take the additional steps required to effect rescission under California law.
Note:	Broad liability releases in lien settlements prevent California’s State Compensation Insurance Fund from suing Accident Help Line and providers that the carrier says overbilled for medical treatment.
Citation:	No. 16-55501
WCC Citation:	D.C. No. 8:12-cv-01072-CJC-JCG

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WallDesign, Inc.,		10/20/2011
Summary:	STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND v. WALLDESIGN INCORPORATED STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WALLDESIGN INCORPORATED, Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION State Compensation Insurance Fund (the Fund) provided workers' compensation insurance to WallDesign Incorporated (WallDesign) under two insurance policies. WallDesign failed to pay the premium the Fund claimed was owing; the amount of the final premium was determined through an audit of WallDesign's records by the Fund. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Fund issued two workers' compensation insurance policies to WallDesign. DeLeon filed a first amended complaint on May 17, 2010, seeking $1,045,905. 35 in damages for the unpaid workers' compensation premium.
Note:	The four-year statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit to collect unpaid premium begins running after the insurer completes an audit and demands payment, if the policy states those terms, the California 4th District Court of Appeal ruled on Thursday in a case of first impression.
Citation:	G044354
WCC Citation:	WCC 38142011 CA