Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?

Case Law Library

Case Name: Weisdorf-Mahserjian v. Serco, Inc. 03/06/2009
Summary: The Allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint In her complaint, plaintiff alleges the following facts: Plaintiff worked for defendant beginning in June 1999. In February 2003, plaintiff injured her left shoulder in an accident which occurred while she was working. It specifically found that plaintiffs workers compensation injury leave was a "protected activity," and a "motivating reason" defendant terminated plaintiff. Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees After the jury returned its verdict, plaintiff moved for an award of $180,545. 50 in attorneys fees. Indeed, the record indicates that plaintiff reached less than excellent results even with respect to her retaliation cause of action.
Note: A trial court correctly awarded one-fourth of a plaintiff's request for attorney fees in a Fair Employment and Housing Act suit because she only prevailed on one of her five causes of action.
Citation: B206243
WCC Citation: WCC 35032009 CA
Case Name: Welch v. CSTRB 01/31/2012
Summary: WELCH v. CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT BOARD MELANIE WELCH, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT BOARD, Defendant and Respondent. That opinion states that Welch filed a complaint about school safety on October 30, 1998, and three days later "the District notified Welch that it had placed her on administrative leave with pay effective November 2, 1998. "Meanwhile, in September 2006, Welch was examined by Dr. Rosemary Tyl to assist the Social Security Administration in determining whether Welch was disabled for purposes of receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. If Welch is correct, then she was entitled to relief, but Welch is not correct. According to the finding of the ALJ, which Welch has not challenged, Welch "has a total of 4. 327 years of CalSTRS service credit. "
Note: The California State Teachers' Retirement Board needs to consider whether misinformation prevented an injured teacher from prevailing on her disability retirement claim.
Citation: C062517
WCC Citation: WCC 38512012 CA
Case Name: Welcher, Strong, Lopez, & Williams v. WCAB 08/31/2006
Summary: See Brodie v. WCAB, Welcher v. WCAB (S146979, S147030). Relying on its own en banc decision in Nabors, supra, 70 Cal. Comp. Cases at page 856,*fn2 the WCAB disagreed and denied Welcher's petition. Applying the WCAB's decision in Nabors, the WCJ awarded Lopez permanent disability benefits of $80,910. 73 for a 79 percent permanent disability. While employed by United Airlines, Williams sustained a cumulative industrial injury to his lumbar spine ending in August 2003. The WCAB then determines the monetary value of permanent disability benefits payable for this percentage of permanent disability.
Note: The Legislature did not intend to alter the old apportionment method with the 2004 amendments.
Citation: 142 Cal. App. 4th 818
WCC Citation: WCC 31782006 CA
Case Name: Western Growers Ins. Co. v. WCAB (Austin) 06/01/1993
Summary: WESTERN GROWERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, BOYD WAYNE AUSTIN et al. , Respondents. Petitioner Western Growers Insurance Company (Western) and respondent Industrial Indemnity (Industrial) were the workers' compensation carriers for Kirschenman Enterprises during the relevant periods. Western filed with the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) a petition for reconsideration pursuant to section 5900. We reject a further claim by both Western and Industrial that the WCAB erroneously failed to apportion a percentage of Austin's disability to nonindustrial aggravating factors. Western and Industrial have cited no authority requiring the WCJ, the WCAB or this court to accept the AME's recommended apportionment of liability.
Note: Liability for a CT runs from year preceding DOI or last exposure, whichever occurs first.
Citation: 16 Cal.App.4th 227
WCC Citation: WCC 4101993 CA
Case Name: Wheeler & Beaton v. WCAB 11/16/1995
Summary: WHEELER & BEATON, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY , Respondents. COUNSEL Wheeler & Beaton and Craig A. Kingscott for Petitioner. We therefore annul the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) denying reconsideration of the attorney fees awarded. The law offices of Wheeler & Beaton (petitioner) filed a workers' compensation claim on behalf of Tomlinson on December 27, 1990. The Board also noted that the petition 'is subject to dismissal for failure to comply with WCAB Rule 10778. '
Note: Consider atty. services resulting in subst. higher benefits; may legitimate higher award of atty. fees.
Citation: 40 Cal.App.4th 389
WCC Citation: WCC 27141995 CA
Case Name: Whetstone v. City of Lodi 03/28/2012
Summary: WHETSTONE v. CITY OF LODI VICKY WHETSTONE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CITY OF LODI, Defendant and Respondent. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED HOCH, J. Vicky Whetstone appeals from a judgment dismissing her petition for writ of mandate against the City of Lodi (the City) following an order sustaining the City's demurrer without leave to amend. The City informed Whetstone that if she did not file for disability retirement with the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), the City would file the application on her behalf. In October 2006, Whetstone sent the City a letter demanding that she be returned to her former job and compensated for back pay. While the amended petition alleged exemption from compliance with the Act, the City argued the asserted exemptions did not apply to Whetstone because she "was not an employee of the City of Lodi during the period of time for which she seeks monetary damages. "
Note: A municipal employee's action to recover back-pay and benefits for the time during which the city constructively separated her from employment after her industrial injury was barred by the California Tort Claims Act.
Citation: C067003
WCC Citation: WCC 38782012 CA
Case Name: White v. City of Los Angeles Part 1/2 08/11/2017
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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             ANTHONY EARL WHITE, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al. , Defendants and Respondents. .             B264675 .             Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC486269 .             APPEAL from a judgment and order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Peter J. Mirich, Judge. INTRODUCTION .             Plaintiff and appellant Anthony White worked as a custodian for Los Angeles World Airports (airport), a department of the City of Los Angeles (City). In order to work at the Los Angeles International Airport, White needed to obtain a security badge.
Note: California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that a former airport custodian failed to prove his disability discrimination claims, as a matter of law.
Citation: B264675
WCC Citation: Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC486269
Case Name: White v. City of Los Angeles Part 2/2 08/11/2017
Summary: .           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS  .           LAVIN, J. .         WE CONCUR:  .         EDMON, P. J. *  .         * Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. White named both the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles World Airports, a department of the City of Los Angeles, as defendants in this suit. White took a similar approach with respect to the other three causes of action resolved by the jury.
Note: California’s 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled that a former airport custodian failed to prove his disability discrimination claims, as a matter of law.
Citation: B264675
WCC Citation: Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC486269
Case Name: Whittier Union High School District v. Haven Construction, Inc. 02/17/2009
Summary: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN No. B203237 February 17, 2009 WHITTIER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. HAVEN CONSTRUCTION, INC. , DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. Larson & Gaston and Alisa E. Sandoval for Plaintiff and Appellant Whittier Union High School District. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. Inez Oliva and her employer Whittier Union High School District (Whittier) appeal from the judgment entered in favor of Haven Construction, Inc. (Haven) after a jury returned a special verdict finding Haven was not negligent in constructing a staircase on which Oliva fell and sustained injuries. Whittier asked Haven to construct wooden stairs to make the trailer accessible for Oliva and others until the seismic retrofitting was complete. On October 25, 2005 Whittier sued Haven alleging negligence and seeking reimbursement for the $120,181. 16 in workers compensation benefits it had paid to Oliva.
Note: A trial court erroneously refused to allow jury instructions on the doctrine of negligence per se in a case featuring an employer and an injured worker's suits alleging that a construction company built faulty wooden stairs.
Citation: B203237
WCC Citation: WCC 34932009 CA
Case Name: Wiley v. WCAB 05/21/2008
Summary: -ooOoo- Alvin Wiley petitions for a writ of review to inquire into and determine the lawfulness of the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Rules of Court, rule 8. 494. ) Wiley contends the WCAB erred in concluding a two-year limit on workers' compensation temporary disability (TD) benefits enacted as part of the 2004 workers' compensation reforms (Sen. Bill No. 899 (2003-2004 Reg. Following our recent decision in Brooks v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (2008) 161 Cal. App. 4th 1522 [75 Cal. Rptr. 3d 277] (Brooks), we conclude the WCAB appropriately limited Wiley to a combined total of two-years of enhanced IDL and TD benefits. The parties stipulated that Wiley nevertheless remained totally temporary disabled through the time of a May 3, 2007, workers' compensation hearing. Finding there was not any significant statutory distinction between regular and enhanced IDL, the WCAB disagreed with the WCJ and concluded Wiley was entitled to only 104 weeks of combined TD and enhanced IDL.
Note: [Unpublished] Whether or not enhanced IDL results in payment of full salary, payment of enhanced IDL benefits equals payment of temporary disability indemnity, for purposes of the section 4656(c)(1) limitation on temporary disability indemnity.'
Citation: F053859
WCC Citation: WCC 33712008 CA
1706 Results Page 165 of 171