Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?

Case Law Library

Case Name: CA Highway Patrol v. WCAB (Clark) 03/14/1986
Summary: CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JERALD CLARK, Respondents. We will hold that the two terms do not have the same meaning and will annul the order. Jerald Clark commenced his employment as a California Highway Patrol Officer on December 5, 1966, and retired from service on August 6, 1981. Upon petition for reconsideration by the employer, California Highway Patrol, the Board denied the petition. 3212 (police and firemen), 3212. 2 (custodial officers), 3212. 3 (state police), 3212. 4 (campus firemen), 3212. 5 (highway patrol), 3212. 6 (law enforcement investigators), 3212. 7 (other peace officers), 3213 (campus policemen). )
Note: When judge whose ruling is subject of Petition is unavailable, Board can decide independently.
Citation: 178 Cal.App.3d 1016, 51 CCC 123
WCC Citation: WCC 27351986 CA
Case Name: CA State Auto. Assoc. v. WCAB (Martin) 10/16/1998
Summary: The first was that Applicant was not a Qualified Injured Worker and the second was that Applicant was entitled to retroactive VRMA. The WCJ reversed the RU Determination in part in its FA&O when it deemed that Applicant was, in fact, a QIW and was entitled to VRMA. Defendants petitioned for reconsideration, claiming that Applicant chose to retire and declined Defendants' offer of modified work and, therefore, the awards were not warranted. The WCAB granted reconsideration and issued a decision that adopted the WCJ's report and findings. WRIT DENIED, Defendants' request for a stay of proceedings DENIED, and Applicant's request for Labor Code Sec.
Note: Applicant's retirement not a waiver of right to voc. rehab. if related to employer's failure to give notice of rights to rehab.
Citation: 63 CCC 1413
WCC Citation: WCC 28001998 CA
Case Name: Ca.-Western States Life Ins. Co. v. IAC (Baird) 03/07/1963
Summary: CALIFORNIA-WESTERN STATES LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION, VIOLA B. BAIRD et al. , Respondents. Everett A. Corten, Emily B. Johnson, Rupert A. Pedrin, Weingand, Tipton, Kendig & Stockwell, Jaffe, Mallery & Thompson and Herlihy & Herlihy for Respondents. Immediately thereafter during 'a heated discussion' with Mr. Benton, Mrs. Baird collapsed and was taken to a hospital for treatment. Cases 100. petitioner neither became a party to this agreement nor did it participate in any of the negotiations that culminated in the compromise. By this formula petitioner's lien claim was reduced to 1/29th of the $5,500 lump sum payment or $200.
Note: The original Baird Formula to determine amount of reimbursement to EDD where there is an issue which may defeat entire claim.
Citation: 59 Cal. 2d 257; 28 Cal. Rptr. 872; 28 CCC 77
WCC Citation: WCC 3661963 CA
Case Name: Cabral v. Ralphs Grocery Company 11/10/2009
Summary: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO No. E044098 November 10, 2009 MARIA CABRAL, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT, v. RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT. Ralphs sought clarification and the following exchange occurred: "[COUNSEL FOR RALPHS]: Your Honor, may I just inquire?In the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, Ralphs argued that Horn owed no duty to Decedent and that the intervening superseding negligence of Decedent exonerated Ralphs from all liability. Opinion Footnotes *fn1 Although Ralphs Grocery Company and Hen Horn were parties at the trial level, Ralphs is the only named defendant on appeal. *fn2 Although Maria Cabral and her children were parties at the trial level, Maria Cabral is the only named plaintiff on appeal.
Note: The California Supreme Court declined to adopt an exemption from the general duty of ordinary care for Ralphs, after a negligent driver crashed into one of its trucks that was parked alongside the highway.
Citation: E044098
WCC Citation: WCC 37212009 CA
Case Name: Caesar's Restaurant v. IAC 12/07/1959
Summary: CAESAR'S RESTAURANT (a Corporation) et al. , Petitioners, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and EARL JOHNSON, Respondents. While employed as a cook by Caesar's Restaurant, on August 29, 1958, applicant struck his right elbow against a stack of dishes, causing a bursitis of the elbow tendon. He received medical treatment for the injury but worked until the restaurant was destroyed by fire, November 30th. On that date, Johnson filed an application for adjustment of claim, asking for temporary disability, permanent disability, medical treatment and litigation expenses. The parties then agreed to an examination by a doctor on the commission's medical staff, to take place following the hearing.
Note: A waiver of a right requires clear intent to relinquish such right.
Citation: 175 Cal.App.2d 850, 24 CCC 297
WCC Citation: WCC 25751959 CA
Case Name: Caimol-Cruz v. Retirement Bd. of San Francisco 03/22/2012
Summary: OF SAN FRANCISCO CORAZON CAIMOL-CRUZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RETIREMENT BOARD OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Defendant and Respondent. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS MARGULIES, J. Corazon Caimol-Cruz appeals from the denial of her petition for writ of mandate overturning a decision of the Retirement Board of the City and County of San Francisco (the Board) denying her application for a disability retirement. Facts*fn1 Cruz was hired by the City and County of San Francisco as a legal secretary in July 1981 and was assigned to the district attorney's (DA's) office. On the same date, she also filed an application for voluntary service retirement with the stipulation her service retirement would be converted to disability retirement if her disability retirement application was granted. for each year of credited service, if such retirement allowance exceeds 40 percent of his or her average final compensation .
Note: A legal secretary with a long history of gastrointestinal problems  and of violating office protocols for calling in sick  was not entitled to disability retirement since she had worked for years, despite her medical need for frequent bathroom breaks, and her employer was willing and able to accommodate her.
Citation: A130992
WCC Citation: WCC 38772012 CA
Case Name: Cal-Western States Life Ins. Co. v. IAC 02/02/1962
Summary: The newly hired controller moved Mrs. Baird out of her private office and into the general office area. Immediately thereafter, during a heated discussion with Mr. Benton, Mrs. Baird collapsed and was removed to a hospital for treatment. Copies of the notice and request for allowance of the lien were filed with the commission and were duly served upon all parties. This argument was rejected in Aetna Life Insurance Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission, 38 Cal. The 1957 amendment specify the exact matters which must be the subject of the findings in regard to a lien claim.
Note: Board cannot reduce non-party claimant lien w/o specific finding as to applicant's entitlement to benefits.
Citation: 27 CCC 49
WCC Citation: WCC 25931962 CA
Case Name: Cal. Dept. of Corrections v WCAB (Decourcey, Jr.) 08/28/2012
Summary: DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS v. WCAB CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and ROBERT DECOURCEY, JR. , Respondents. The employee's conduct is "special" if it is "extraordinary in relation to routine duties, not outside the scope of employment. "(1964) 61 Cal. 2d 289, 295; Los Angeles Jewish Community Council v. Industrial Acc. (1982) 138 Cal. App. 3d 584, 590 (C. L. Pharris); City of San Diego v. Workers' Comp. The `special mission' exception has been explained by the courts first in Dimming v. WCAB (1972) 37 CCC 211 and then in C L Pharris Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. WCAB (Lindsey) (1982) 47 CCC 1420.
Note: A corrections officer was not entitled to benefits for injuries he sustained in a car accident while driving to a remote area of the San Bernardino Mountains in order to cover a co-worker's shift on guard duty.
Citation: E054153
WCC Citation: WCC 39272012 CA
Case Name: Cal. State Auto. Ass'n Inter-Insurance Bureau v. WCAB (Hestehauge) 03/22/2006
Summary: Filed 3/22/06 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION INTER-INSURANCE BUREAU, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PAUL HESTEHAUGE, Respondents. The Charkinses' insurer, California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau (CSAA), filed a petition for writ of review in this court challenging the Appeals Board's determination. On Hestehauge's first day painting at the Charkinses' home, he fell from a ladder placed on top of a scaffold. The Appeals Board granted a petition for reconsideration filed by CSAA, but then took nearly two years to issue a decision. (In-Home, at p. 727; see also State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Workers' Comp.
Note: Unlicensed house painter not employee of house owners where he did not work 52 hours or earn more than $100 pre-injury.
Citation: 137 Cal. App. 4th 1040
WCC Citation: WCC 31492006 CA
Case Name: Caldo v. Metalclad Insulation 06/11/2007
Summary: Ct. No. CGG-02-412325) Two days after a jury verdict in his favor in his asbestos-related personal injury action against defendants Metalclad Insulation Company (Metalclad) and John Crane Inc. (Crane), Anthony Cadlo (Cadlo) died. These outside vendors, also referred to as contractor-suppliers, were Metalclad, Thorpe Insulation (Thorpe), Fenco, and Armstrong Contracting and Supply (ACandS). Ay did not know how much insulation supplied to the LBNS in 1960, 1965, and 1967 came from Metalclad. Ay said that, in the 1960's, Metalclad supplied asbestos insulation to and performed insulation contract work on ships at the LBNS, but Thorpe, Fenco, and ACandS did not. Trueblood's Testimony Metalclad employee Donald Trueblood testified that between 1933 and 1973 Metalclad was involved in the installation and sale of asbestos-containing insulation materials.
Note: The court in the published portion of its opinion In the published portion of this opinion rejected the defendants' attack on future and noneconomic damages.
Citation: 151 Cal. App. 4th 1311
WCC Citation: WCC 32292007 CA
1706 Results Page 22 of 171