Case Name:	The Earthgrains Co. v. WCAB (Hansen)		07/03/2008
Summary:	The Earthgrains Company (Earthgrains) petitions this court for a writ of review from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). *fn2 All three awards stated Earthgrains would provide further medical care to cure or relieve the effects of the injuries. After Earthgrains petitioned for reconsideration, the WCJ issued an amendment to the findings and award. The WCAB thereafter summarily denied the petition for reconsideration based on the reasoning set forth by the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. Filing an Application for Adjudication establishes jurisdiction with the WCAB to initiate proceedings for the collection of workers' compensation benefits.
Note:	[Unpublished] From the WCAB's opinion and the evidence provided with the petition for writ of review, it is impossible to determine the WCAB's basis for concluding Hansen became permanent and stationary on August 24, 2006.
Citation:	F054600
WCC Citation:	WCC 33922008 CA

Case Name:	The People v. Crystal Caldwell		04/20/2011
Summary:	Defendant Crystal Caldwell was found guilty of two felonies -- workers' compensation insurance fraud (Ins. BACKGROUND In June 2008, Caldwell was employed by Los Angeles Community College District as a secretary at Los Angeles Mission College. Mark Shoup conducted the surveillance and made a video recording of Caldwell on two Saturdays, July 19 and 26, 2008. =====FOOTNOTES===== *fn1 Zwick first learned that Caldwell had retained an attorney on June 24, 2008, 18 days after the injury. At the sentencing and probation hearing, Caldwell asked for a restitution hearing to determine exactly what was spent on medical treatment, in light of the People's concession that Caldwell did suffer an injury.
Note:	An applicant must serve a sentence of at least three years on formal probation for workers' compensation fraud and attempted perjury, thanks to a claims examiner's hunch and surveillance video.
Citation:	B222055
WCC Citation:	WCC 37492011 CA

Case Name:	The People v. Guillen		05/11/2017
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115(a).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 SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             HARIBERTO GUILLEN, Defendant and Appellant. .             H043599 .             (Santa Clara County Super. .             On appeal, we appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. .             In People v. Serrano (2012) 211 Cal. App. 4th 496 (Serrano), this court concluded that Wende review is limited to the defendant’s first appeal of right from a criminal conviction (Serrano, supra, at p. 503). .           WE CONCUR: .           __________________________ ELIA, ACTING P. J. .           __________________________ MIHARA, J.
Note:
Citation:	H043599
WCC Citation:	Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. C157980

Case Name:	The People v. Kinya Jeanette Atlas-Hearn		04/22/2011
Summary:	Defendant also contends the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's implied finding that defendant harbored the intent necessary to commit the charged crimes. Defendant asked to be relieved so she could go to the clinic to obtain medical aid. Defendant's request was granted and as a result she returned to the office where she reported her injury to a company field supervisor. Defendant signed a workers' compensation claim form that described her injury as head and neck tension and pain. Defendant also claimed at trial as she does on appeal that a man with a cane called her a bitch.
Note:	A trial court did not err by failing to give jury instructions that explained the rules regarding use of circumstantial evidence in the trial of a bus driver accused of workers' compensation fraud because the prosecution relied on direct evidence.
Citation:	E049871
WCC Citation:	WCC 37522011 CA

Case Name:	The People v. Newman		06/02/2017
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 SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             DAVE ARNESS NEWMAN, Defendant and Appellant. .             H042192 .             (Santa Clara County Super. .             Defendant now appeals from the judgment of conviction. .             Defendant’s friend, John Greene, owned a business that “schedule[d] officials for sporting events. ” Defendant worked as a referee for Greene. .           ________________________________ RUSHING, P. J. .           WE CONCUR: .           ___________________________________ PREMO, J.
Note:
Citation:	H042192
WCC Citation:	Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. C1116412

Case Name:	The People v. Riddles		03/23/2017
Summary:	Filed 3/23/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             JOHN PAUL RIDDLES, Defendant and Appellant. .             D069419 .             (Super. .             In this case, defendant and appellant John Paul Riddles pled guilty to one count of workers' compensation insurance fraud in violation of Insurance Code1 section 11760, subdivision (a). .           Initially, following a restitution hearing, the court ordered Riddles to pay FCI $52,259 in restitution. .           WE CONCUR: .           NARES, J.
Note:
Citation:	D069419
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. SCD238770

Case Name:	The People v. Snow		05/31/2017
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115(a).   COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             SARA CHARIS SNOW, Defendant and Appellant. .             D070425 .             (Super. .             A jury convicted Sara Charis Snow of three counts of workers' compensation fraud (Ins. .           Later that month, Snow sought treatment from Glenn Nusbaum, D. C. , who became her primary treating doctor. .           During his AME assessment of Snow, Dr. Previte questioned her regarding her "domestic functioning. "
Note:
Citation:	D070425
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. SCD260150

Case Name:	The Traveler's Property Casualty Company of America v. Actavis, Inc. Part 1/2		06/11/2017
Summary:	Filed 11/06/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             THE TRAVELER’S PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, .             v. .             ACTAVIS, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Appellants. .             G053749 .             (Super. .             Blank Rome, Elizabeth B. Kim and James R. Murray for Defendants and Appellants. [¶] . [¶] .
Note:	The 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled that two commercial general liability insurance carriers have no obligation to defend a group of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors from lawsuits in California and Illinois over their alleged deceptive marketing practices for opioid medications.
Citation:	G053749
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. 30-2014-00746842

Case Name:	The Traveler's Property Casualty Company of America v. Actavis, Inc. Part 2/2		06/11/2017
Summary:	.           Watson argues the Products Exclusions are ambiguous due to an exception in section 2. d(3) of the Travelers Policies. .           FYBEL, J.   .           WE CONCUR: .           BEDSWORTH, ACTING P. J. .           MOORE, J. Appellants are Actavis, Inc. , Actavis LLC, Actavis Pharma, Inc. , Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , Watson Laboratories, Inc. , and Watson Pharma, Inc. The parties refer to the appellants collectively as Watson, and, for the sake of consistency, we shall do the same. Significantly, both the St. Paul and Travelers Property Products Exclusion provisions encompass statements/representations that were made or that should have been [made] regarding Watson’s products.
Note:	The 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled that two commercial general liability insurance carriers have no obligation to defend a group of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors from lawsuits in California and Illinois over their alleged deceptive marketing practices for opioid medications.
Citation:	G053749
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. 30-2014-00746842

Case Name:	Thomas v. City of Los Angeles		12/06/2012
Summary:	THOMAS v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES MALCOLM THOMAS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and Appellant. Carmen A. Trutanich, City Attorney, Claudia McGee Henry, Assistant City Attorney, and Gregory P. Orland, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendant and Appellant. Plaintiff Malcolm Thomas (Thomas), a police officer in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), brought suit against the City of Los Angeles (City) for disability discrimination and related claims. [The City] failed to engage in an interactive process with [Thomas] and acted in an unreasonable and hostile manner towards [Thomas] and his disabilities. Thomas further alleges that "[a]s a proximate result of [the City's] discrimination, [the City] also denied promotion and/or job benefits to [Thomas].
Note:	The 2nd District Court of Appeals overturned a $705,804 verdict in favor of a former Los Angeles police officer on his disability discrimination claims based on prejudicial errors in the instructions issued to the jury at trial.
Citation:	B229265
WCC Citation:	WCC 39562012 CA