Case Name:	Barnes v. WCAB		07/10/2000
Summary:	RONNIE BARNES, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT et al. , Respondents. [23 Cal. 4th 681] COUNSEL Ronnie Barnes, in pro. (Neither applicant nor the record of proceedings explains the basis for EDD's alleged failure to comply with the provisional award. )Dr. Feiwell prepared a second report on June 17, 1996, after reviewing a '24 inch stack of [applicant's] medical records. 'A hearing on the petition to terminate liability was held on March 5, 1998, before Workers' Compensation Referee (WCR) Louie.
Note:	CA. Supreme Ct. rules that Sec. 5803 is still subject to Sec. 5804's strict limitation period.
Citation:	23 Cal.4th 679, 65 CCC 78
WCC Citation:	WCC 26452000 CA

Case Name:	Barney v. National Gypsum Co.		09/15/2011
Summary:	In May 2007, decedent Timothy Barney died while repairing a conveyer system on NGI, Inc. 's (National Gypsum) property. In May 2008, plaintiffs Michelle Barney, Christina Barney, and others (collectively plaintiffs) filed a workers' compensation action against National Gypsum and Jenson Mechanical (Jenson) alleging Barney was an employee of both companies when he sustained injuries causing his death. Approximately one year later, plaintiffs filed a wrongful death lawsuit against National Gypsum in Contra Costa County Superior Court alleging Barney was an employee of Jenson "working at" property owned by National Gypsum. The allegations in plaintiffs' complaint mirrored the allegations in their workers' compensation petition, except that plaintiffs alleged Barney was an employee of Jenson not National Gypsum and that he was "working at" property owned by National Gypsum when he fell from the conveyer system. According to plaintiffs, their dismissal of National Gypsum from the workers' compensation action meant there was "no other action pending involving National [Gypsum].
Note:	A decedent's survivors could not avoid a stay on their wrongful death lawsuit by dismissing their workers' compensation claim against the decedent's potential employer.
Citation:	A128854
WCC Citation:	WCC 38012011 CA

Case Name:	Baroid v. WCAB		07/14/1981
Summary:	N. L. BAROID, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and THOMAS G. HANCOCK, Respondents. The WCAB has found that applicant's injury is compensable under the Workers' Compensation Act. Applicant and the WCAB, however, assert that the injury is compensable under one or more exceptions to the going and coming rule. Relying upon the above analysis of the workers' compensation judge, the WCAB denied reconsideration. The workers' compensation judge's decision, which the WCAB adopted, here relies specifically upon L. A. Jewish etc. Council v. Ind.
Note:	Discussion of exceptions to 'going and coming' rule.
Citation:	121 C.A.3d 558
WCC Citation:	WCC 28531981 CA

Case Name:	Barr v. WCAB		06/23/2008
Summary:	We conclude the WCAB retains discretion to award costs whether or not the report itself is admissible. Because the WCAB failed to exercise its discretion in Barr's case by erroneously finding that an inadmissible report precludes an award of costs as a matter of law, we remand the case to the WCAB to exercise its discretion. FACTS Jim Barr had preexisting injuries when, in August 1999, he sustained additional injuries while working for Maita Oldsmobile Body Shop as an estimator. We now address whether the WCAB has the discretion to award costs for the preparation of a vocational rehabilitation consultant's report. Because these costs are not defined by statute, the WCAB and SIF venture far and wide to resolve our narrow issue.
Note:	The WCAB retains discretion to award costs under Labor Code section 5811, whether or not a vocational rehabilitation consultant's report itself is admissible under Labor Code section 5703.
Citation:	C054907
WCC Citation:	WCC 33872008 CA

Case Name:	Barragan vs. WCAB, Hartford		10/19/1987
Summary:	SANDRA BARRAGAN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, Respondents (Opinion by Best, J. , with Hamlin, Acting P. J. , and Ivey, J. , concurring. )By arrangements made through Galen College, Barragan began her externship program in the Rehabilitation Services Department at Saint Agnes Hospital. As Barragan sat down to take the blood pressure, her back popped, and she lost the feeling in her legs. Mrs. Miller did not offer Barragan a job and, in fact, had no authority to do so without administrative approval. The objective actions of Barragan and Saint Agnes Hospital clearly indicate that these parties intended an arrangement in which Barragan performed services for the hospital and the hospital provided training and instruction to Barragan to enable her to earn her diploma.
Note:	Worker who receives instruction and training in lieu of monetary remuneration is an employee.
Citation:	195 Cal.App.3d 637
WCC Citation:	WCC 29781987 CA

Case Name:	Barrett Business Services, Inc v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and Rafael Rivas		03/22/2012
Summary:	Barrett Business Services, Inc v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and Rafael Rivas, No. B233168 (Cal. App. Dist. 2 03/22/2012) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE B233168 March 22, 2012 BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC. , PETITIONER, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND RAFAEL RIVAS, RESPONDENTS, (Los Angeles County W. C. A. B. Case No. ADJ2596770) PROCEEDING to review a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. A compromise and release of the workers' compensation claim of applicant Rafael Rivas contained an incorrect address for Rivas. His employer, Barrett Business Services, Inc. (Barrett), sent a $17,000 check to Rivas at the incorrect address. Thus the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge's order and award correctly found that Barrett was liable to pay settlement proceeds of $17,000 to Rivas. Barrett petitioned to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) for reconsideration of that order and award.
Note:	An employer must send an injured worker a second $17,000 settlement check after the first check was signed and cashed by an unknown party.
Citation:	B233168
WCC Citation:	WCC 38722012 CA

Case Name:	Barrueta v. Ralphs Grocery Company		08/16/2012
Summary:	Mark Barrueta v. Ralphs Grocery Company No. B233152 (Cal. App. Dist. 2 08/16/2012) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR B233152 August 16, 2012 MARK BARRUETA, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. ISI hired the ODO's specifically to work as armed security guards at various facilities of defendant Ralphs Grocery Company (Ralphs) during the "Southern California Supermarket Strike of 2003-2004" (strike), which lasted from October 2003 to February 2004. provided services to Ralphs Grocery Company through [ISI]; 3. )"These declarants testify, almost identically, that they were directed to perform grocery store duties by the Ralphs store managers. The store managers testify that Ralphs told them that the off-duty peace officers were not to perform grocery store duties.
Note:	A trial court judge did not abuse his discretion in declining to grant class certification to a group of off-duty and retired peace officers who worked as security guards at various California grocery stores during a labor strike on their claims that they were misclassified as independent contractors.
Citation:	B233152
WCC Citation:	WCC 39202012 CA

Case Name:	Bartholomew v. SeaRiver Maritime, Inc.		03/16/2011
Summary:	BARTHOLOMEW v. SEARIVER MARITIME, INC. ALAN BARTHOLOMEW, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SEARIVER MARITIME, INC. , Defendants and Respondents. This appeal arises from the asbestos-related injuries sustained by plaintiff Alan Bartholomew, a ship repair worker employed by West Winds, Inc. (West Winds), while working on various ships owned by defendant SeaRiver Maritime, Inc. (SeaRiver). Bartholomew brought suit against SeaRiver as a vessel owner under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (33 U. S. C. 901, et seq. On April 4, 2007, Bartholomew filed a complaint seeking damages for his asbestos exposure against numerous defendants, including SeaRiver. Subsequently, in response to written discovery propounded by SeaRiver, Bartholomew reiterated that he was unable to name a specific SeaRiver vessel.
Note:	California's 1st District Court of Appeal has clarified the role of a maritime presumption about ship repair contractors in Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act suits against vessel owners, a defense attorney said.
Citation:	A127424
WCC Citation:	WCC 37282011 CA

Case Name:	Bassett-McGregor v. WCAB		11/09/1988
Summary:	Applicant was referred to Dr. William Owen by Dr. Virgil Reyes in 1979 for another opinion on her rapid heartbeat. In 1982, Dr. Owen told her to cut down on her hours because he felt the problem was related to her job. Applicant did not recall being under any unusual stress that morning, but remembered that it was 'extremely hot' at Kelly's. She returned to work full-time in January 1985 in her former capacity and continued to conduct sales in the field. 3 Dr. Reyes did indicate that he did not report the disability as a workers' compensation claim.
Note:	Amending claim for specific injury to one of cumulative injuries does not change date of filing.
Citation:	205 Cal.App.3d 1102, 53 CCC 502
WCC Citation:	WCC 27591988 CA

Case Name:	Batterton v. Dutra Group		01/23/2018
Summary:	.   FOR PUBLICATION .   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT .   CHRISTOPHER BATTERTON, Plaintiff-Appellee, .   v. .   DUTRA GROUP, Defendant-Appellant. They are not proved, and we intimate no view as to whether punitive damages may ultimately turn out to be appropriate. .   The plaintiff, Christopher Batterton, was a deckhand on a vessel owned and operated by the defendant, Dutra Group. While Batterton was working on the vessel in navigable waters, a hatch cover blew open and crushed his left hand. The lack of a mechanism for exhausting the pressurized air made the vessel unseaworthy and caused permanent disability and other damages to Batterton.
Note:	Despite a split among the federal appellate circuits, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is sticking to its view that a seaman can receive an award of punitive damages on an unseaworthiness claim.
Citation:	15-56775
WCC Citation: