Login


Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?

Case Law Library



 
Case Name: Wilkinson v. WCAB 05/25/1977
Summary: Wilkinson claims he should have received an award of $8,662. 50 based upon a combined disability for both injuries of 30 1/2 percent. Applicant Wilkinson was employed as a cook at the Taurean Restaurant in La Habra, Orange County, during the spring of 1972. Wilkinson applied for workers' compensation benefits for both injuries. Appeals Bd. , supra, 16 Cal. 3d 1, for calculation of benefits in multiple injury cases, the judge awarded Wilkinson $3,587. 50 for each injury, or a total of $7,175. The board relied upon a prior panel decision in Revere Copper and Brass v. W. C. A. B. (Dunlap) (1969) 34 Cal. Comp. Cases 532.
Note: Whenever a worker sustains successive industrial injuries to the same part of his body while working for the same employer, and these injuries become permanent at the same time, the board should render a single award for the combined disability.
Citation: 19 Cal.3d 491
WCC Citation: WCC 24771977 CA
 
 
Case Name: Willette vs. AU Electric Corp. 10/03/2004
Summary: AU ELECTRIC CORPORATION; and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendants. In the May 17, 2004 decision, it was found that Michael A. Willette ("applicant") sustained industrial injury to his low back and tailbone on October 13, 2003, while employed as an alarm installer by Au Electric Corporation, the insured of State Compensation Insurance Fund ("defendant"). Based on utilization review reports issued by Dr. Chappelka, defendant denied the requests for a TENS unit, water therapy, and acupuncture. This opinion is not intended to and does not address all of the myriad issues that surround the utilization review process. When the statutory language is clear and unambiguous, the WCAB will enforce the statute according to its plain terms.
Note: Five part procedural test on utilization review objections; UR reports were admissible because they are specifically required in the statutory scheme under LC 4610 and are therefore relevant on issues involving medical care, disapproving their prior holding in Czarnecki.
Citation: 68 CCC 1298; En Banc
WCC Citation: WCC 30322004 CA
 
 
Case Name: Williams v. County of San Bernardino Probation Dep't 03/13/2008
Summary: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO No. E043035 March 13, 2008 LETICIA WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROBATION DEPARTMENT, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. OPINION Plaintiff Leticia Williams appeals from a judgment entered in favor of the defendant County of San Bernardino Probation Department (the County), after the trial court granted the County's motion for summary judgment. Factual and Procedural History In August of 2000, the County hired plaintiff as a probation corrections officer (probation officer). Because of plaintiff's injury, the County created a modified, light clerical position for plaintiff at the probation department, Regional Youth and Education Facility.
Note: [Unpublished] Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of material fact.
Citation: E043035
WCC Citation: WCC 33272008 CA
 
 
Case Name: Williams v. Hilb, Rogal & Hobbs Ins. 09/09/2009
Summary: FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND John Daniel Williams and Steven Stuart Simon were boyhood friends in Oklahoma, where Williams still lives and owns his own mortgage brokerage business. After Thaw submitted Williams' application to Travelers, she sent Williams an insurance proposal for Rhino SFS, which Williams accepted "as is. "The court heard testimony from a number of witnesses, including Williams, Simon, Thaw, Karen Williams (Williams' wife), and experts for each side. As it happened, Robyn Thaw's recollection of her telephone conversations with Williams in January 1999 differed from those of Williams, recounted above. She wrote no memorandum to the file (or to Williams) to indicate that workers compensation coverage was offered and declined.
Note: Insurance agent held herself out as having expertise in the insurance needs of the plaintiff-employer and failure to advise plaintiff of the necessity for such insurance, and that it was not included in her package for plaintiff, breached the duty she assumed by holding herself out as 'the expert on the product necessary to satisfy [plaintiff's] insurance needs.'
Citation: B203691
WCC Citation: WCC 35642009 CA
 
 
Case Name: Williams v. Mcdonnel-Douglas Corp. 06/06/1973
Summary: By that document the Board noticed its intention to reopen this matter in order to allow applicant certain medical-legal costs incurred for photocopying medical records. Those proceedings have now been completed and the summary of the argument presented has been reviewed by this Board. Initially, we reject defendant's argument that the Board has no authority under Labor Code Section 4600 to allow medical-legal costs. (See Funk & Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary (1963) page 1384; see also Webster's New International Dictionary (Second Edition 1957 Unabridged) page 2610. )The parties in executing this policy as encouraged by the Board will frequently incur costs in reproducing medical records.
Note: Reimbursement of costs of copying records with material relationship to claim is allowed.
Citation: 8 CCC 325
WCC Citation: WCC 28061973 CA
 
 
Case Name: Williams v. WCAB (Hilton) 07/28/1993
Summary: ALICE S. WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, KENNETH A. HILTON et al. , Respondents. It was stated in the rental agreement that the tenants signing the agreement rented the premises 'individually and severally. 'The parties agreed that the employer and insurer would not be responsible for Hilton's [17 Cal. App. 4th 586] lien claim. Hilton stated he had been successful in collecting large sums of back rent as liens against awards to his tenants. Petitioner, Alice S. Williams, shall recover her costs incurred in this writ proceeding.
Note: No lien against comp. benefits allowed for back due rent when debt accrued prior to injury.
Citation: 17 Cal.App.4th 582
WCC Citation: WCC 24991993 CA
 
 
Case Name: Williams v. WCAB (Satellite) 03/05/1998
Summary: Jodi Williams, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Satellite Technology Management, Fremont Compensation Insurance Company, Respondents. On November 17, 1997, an F&A on rehabilitation issues issued: 1) the monetary cap on vocational rehabilitation expenditures contained in Labor Code Sec. The WCJ's Report and Recommendation on Reconsideration recommended the WCAB deny both Petitions for Reconsideration. In this report, the WCJ noted that there were two issues in the matter regarding: 1) which date the WCAB should use to determine when costs of voc. The WCAB denied both Petitions for Reconsideration and adopted and incorporated the WCJ's Report on Reconsideration.
Note: Reg. 10125 requirements must be satisfied by written documents, but need not be satisfied in notice to applicant of potential eligibility for rehabilitation.
Citation: 63 CCC 493 (Writ Denied)
WCC Citation: WCC 27951998 CA
 
 
Case Name: Williams vs. WCAB 08/18/1998
Summary: I Melissa Williams began her law enforcement career with the City of Long Beach in 1978. From the beginning of his tenure as chief, his attitude toward Williams was antagonistic, and Williams began to experience stress. In March of 1992, Williams sought medical care from a general practitioner who placed her on a leave of absence. [74 Cal. App. 4th 1263] Grattan's psychiatric report was provided to the City on April 28, 1992, 53 days after Williams filed her claim for benefits. Preston interpreted the results of psychological tests he administered to Williams and assessed her as depressed and resentful, noting "life has probably become a great strain" for Williams.
Note: Presumption of compensability applies even if claim is accepted then denied after 90 days.
Citation: 74 CA 4th 1260; 64 CCC 995
WCC Citation: WCC 30231998 CA
 
 
Case Name: Wills v. Superior Court of Orange County 04/13/2011
Summary: LINDA WILLS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Linda Wills appeals from the judgment entered after the trial court granted a summary judgment motion by defendant Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange (OC Court). Wills began working for the OC Court in 1999 as a court processing specialist, and later became a court clerk. But the department reported the incident to the OC Court, and demanded the OC Court never again assign Wills to its facility. The OC Court does not dispute Wills timely filed an administrative complaint with DFEH and obtained a right-to-sue notice.
Note: California law allows an employer to discipline an employee for making threats or engaging in violence, even when those behaviors are the result of a disability.
Citation: G043054
WCC Citation: WCC 37442011 CA
 
1705 Results Page 166 of 171