Case Name:	American Home Assurance v. WCAB (Wuertz)		09/11/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE, Petitioners, v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and DONALD WUERTZ, Respondents. Mullen & Fulippi, LLP, Bruce K. Wade for Petitioner, American Home Assurance. -ooOoo- American Home Assurance (AHA) petitions this court for a writ or review on behalf of its insured, RR Donnelley, from a decision of the Workers Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Safety meetings, meanwhile, occur during regularly scheduled shifts and no one is called in to the worksite from home. The WCAB summarily denied the petition for reconsideration, adopting and incorporating the WCJs report and recommendation.
Note:	A worker who was injured while riding his motorcycle to a rare work-related meeting on his day off was performing a 'special mission' at the time, and is entitled to compensation for his injuries.
Citation:	F057906
WCC Citation:	WCC 35662009 CA

Case Name:	American Medical Response v. WCAB (Westerman)		04/24/2012
Summary:	AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and RONALD WESTERMAN, Respondents. Petitioners American Medical Response and Ace American Insurance Company sought reconsideration, principally on the basis that Westerman did not undergo a critical diagnostic test. FACTS Respondent Westerman was employed as a paramedic by petitioner American Medical Response. According to his wife, Westerman gained weight while employed by American Medical Response. The WCJ's report stated: "In addition, the medical reporting itself does not require reasonable medical certainty as the defendant states here. "
Note:	Substantial evidence existed to prove that a stroke which rendered a 50-year-old paramedic permanently and totally disabled arose out of and in the course of employment, even though the applicant had allegedly refused to undergo a medical test that might have disproved his treating physician's causation theory.
Citation:	B235468
WCC Citation:	WCC 38882012 CA

Case Name:	American Modern Home Ins. Co. v. Fahmian, et al.		04/08/2011
Summary:	Fahmian tendered the matter to his homeowners insurance company, American Modern Home Insurance Company (American Modern), which accepted the defense of the personal injury lawsuit, subject to a reservation of rights. The jury also found that Fahmian did not have sufficient time to make a reasoned reply to American Modern. American Modern did not receive any communication from Fahmian or any attorney purporting to represent him after July 5. Did American Modern expressly notify Sohail Fahmian of American Modern's intent to accept the settlement offer made on behalf of Mr. Rudy Montoya?Co. (1977) 66 Cal. App. 3d 981, 994); because American Modern Home did not give Fahmian a reasonable amount of time to decide, Fahmian is not liable to American Modern Home. "
Note:	A homeowners insurance company is entitled to a $300,000 reimbursement from an insured employer after proving that its policy excluded any coverage for his private business.
Citation:	G042799
WCC Citation:	WCC 37422011 CA

Case Name:	American Safety Casualty Ins. Co. v. Mothershead		05/12/2009
Summary:	Respondent American Safety Casualty Insurance Company (American Safety) filed an action to recover workers' compensation benefits it had paid to Reynoso. Prior to trial, appellants served Code of Civil Procedure section 9981 offers to compromise on both Reynoso and American Safety. The sole issue on appeal is the validity of appellants' offers to compromise made to Reynoso and American Safety. Briskin, Latzanich & Pene, Katherine B. Pene for Plaintiff and Respondent American Safety Casualty Insurance Company and for Intervener and Respondent Salvador Reynoso. The offer was served February 11, 2005 and read, "To Plaintiff, American Safety Casualty Insurance Company and its attorneys of record: [¶] Defendants/Cross-Complainants/Cross-Defendants Terease Mothershead and John Mothershead offer to compromise in the above-entitled action filed by Plaintiff, American Safety Casualty Insurance Company, pursuant to Section 998 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, in exchange for a waiver of costs.
Note:	[Unpublished] Two plaintiffs who did not accept pretrial settlement offers are not liable for a defendant's expert witness fees, because the offers were unclear and conditional.
Citation:	B206494
WCC Citation:	WCC 35212009 CA

Case Name:	Amerigas Propane, LP v. Landstar Ranger, Inc.		05/18/2010
Summary:	Introduction Defendant and cross-complainant Amerigas Propane, L. P. (Amerigas) appeals summary judgment entered on Amerigas's cross-complaint, in favor of cross-defendant Landstar Ranger, Inc. (Landstar). This action arises from Amerigas contracting with motor carrier, Landstar Ranger, Inc. (Landstar), for the transportation of 30 Amerigas propane tanks. King leased to Landstar a tractor and "drop-deck" trailer, referred to as a flatbed trailer, he had recently obtained for hauling loads for Landstar. Amerigas seeks to recover, based on comparative fault, a portion of what Amerigas paid to settle the Kings's underlying lawsuit. Amerigas alleges it is entitled to equitable indemnity from Landstar for a portion of the settlement proceeds, based on Landstar being partially at fault for King's injuries.
Note:	A trial court should not have granted a defendant's motion for summary judgment because a factual question existed about whether an injured trucker was an employee, and whether a company owed him a duty as an independent contractor.
Citation:	E048536
WCC Citation:	WCC 36232010 CA

Case Name:	Amico vs. WCAB		12/02/1974
Summary:	SAM AMICO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, LEUNING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Sims, Acting P. J. , with Elkington, J. , and Bray, J. , concurring. )'As a general rule, the board "must accept as true the intended meaning of [evidence] both uncontradicted and unimpeached. "A second report made after a review of medical reports and files, without reexamination of petitioner, on May 15, 1973, states: "The history I obtained from Mr. Amico indicates that he was never symptom-free following this original laminectomy. These X-rays were later referred to by Dr. Cappeller as follows: "Lumbar Spine dated 3-30-72 -- There are five lumbar bodies. There was also presumably an injury to the right knee, and he developed a hernia in the right inguinal region.
Note:	Prior rating or award does not necessarily evidence prior level of disability.
Citation:
WCC Citation:	WCC 30271974 CA

Case Name:	An Independent Home Support Service, Inc. v. Superior Court of San Diego, State Compensation Insurance Fund		12/21/2006
Summary:	Filed 12/21/06 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL - FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AN INDEPENDENT HOME SUPPORT SERVICE, INC. , Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Respondent; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Real Party in Interest. AIHSS obtained workers' compensation insurance from State Fund on behalf of the two office workers. State Fund denied the appeal, finding that the domestic workers were considered employees of AIHSS for workers' compensation purposes. We conclude that compliance with the requirements of section 1812. 5095 does exempt AIHSS from maintaining workers' compensation insurance for its domestic workers. We conclude that the plain language of section 1812. 5095 demonstrates that it was intended to apply to workers' compensation insurance, not, as State Fund asserts and the court found, only unemployment insurance.
Note:	A referral agency that provides domestic workers to individuals and entities is deemed not to be the employers, for the purposes of workers' compensation, of the domestic workers they refer.
Citation:	145 Cal. App. 4th 1418
WCC Citation:	WCC 32002006 CA

Case Name:	Andersen v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board		04/19/2007
Summary:	Filed 4/19/07 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX d Civil No. B191064 (W. C. A. B. No. GOL 0093796) JOHN ANDERSEN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CITY OF SANTA BARBARA et al. , Respondents. Proceeding to review a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. No appearance for Respondents Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and JT2 Integrated Resources. He also argued that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) improperly applied the apportionment provisions of Senate Bill No. 899 (2003-2004 Reg. Statutory Interpretation We independently interpret workers' compensation statutes to ascertain the intent of the Legislature and effectuate the purpose of the workers' compensation scheme.
Note:	Employer violated section 132a by requiring claimant to use his earned vacation time rather than sick leave to attend medical appointments to care for his industrial injuries.
Citation:	149 Cal. App. 4th 1369, 72 CCC 389
WCC Citation:	WCC 32172007 CA

Case Name:	Anderson v. Catholic Healthcare West		04/11/2013
Summary:	ANDERSON v. CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST JANET ANDERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST, Defendant and Respondent. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 115 MARGULIES, Acting P. J. Janet Anderson appeals from a judgment after a court trial in favor of her former employer, Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) doing business as Mercy Medical Center (Mercy). The subject of alternative positions in the OR was discussed with Anderson, including an open position as a circulating nurse. Anderson discussed the latex allergy with her supervisor at the outpatient surgery center who then designated one of the rooms as a latex-free area for Anderson to perform many of her duties. Due to fears of latex exposure, Anderson turned down a number of positions in the healthcare field.
Note:	A hospital made reasonable efforts to accommodate a nurse with a severe latex allergy and its decision to fire her when a suitable modified duty position could not be found did not violate the Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Citation:	A127934
WCC Citation:	WCC 40022013 CA

Case Name:	Anderson v. Denham Contracting		03/30/2009
Summary:	Filed 3/30/09 Anderson v. Denham Contracting CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8. 1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8. 1115(b). IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE D. CRAIG ANDERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DENHAM CONTRACTING, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. His workers' compensation claim and personal injury claims against other subcontractors have been resolved, but he now appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his negligence complaint against an additional subcontractor on the job, defendant Denham Contracting, Inc. (Denham). Plaintiff filed a complaint for negligence*fn1 against Denham, alleging that Denham was responsible for safety conditions at the location where plaintiff fell and/or [was] responsible for creating the hole and unsafe condition which caused plaintiff to fall and be injured. According to the trial court, The work performed on the roof by Denham was to build a parapet wall around the perimeter of the building.
Note:	[Unpublished] A subcontractor did not owe a project foreman a duty of care to prevent him from falling through a hole in the roof.
Citation:	A119834
WCC Citation:	WCC 35092009 CA

Case Name:	Anderson v. Union Oil Co.		07/17/1975
Summary:	GEORGE L. ANDERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant and Respondent (Opinion by Beach, J. , with Fleming, Acting P. J. , and Compton, J. , concurring. )OPINION BEACH, J. Respondent's employee appeals from a judgment in favor of respondent Union Oil Company in a class action for declaratory relief. The provisions for sick pay allowance are contained in the articles of agreement between respondent Union Oil and the appellant's labor union. Appellant received his full salary during the period of illness; $3,420 under the workmen's compensation statute and $2,095. 58 from respondent Union Oil Company pursuant to the company funded sick pay plan. Whether, under the Union Oil plan, sick pay is the equivalent of 'earnings' and a 'benefit' as defined by Labor Code sections 3751 and 3752. .
Note:	Employer can provide in a voluntary benefit plan for credit against work comp. liabilities.
Citation:	49 Cal.App.3d 968, 40 CCC 970
WCC Citation:	WCC 24601975 CA

Case Name:	Andrade v. City of Milpitas		01/04/2013
Summary:	ANDRADE v. CITY OF MILPITAS YVONNE ANDRADE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CITY OF MILPITAS, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Yvonne Andrade brought an action against defendant City of Milpitas (City) for failure to accommodate her disability. Though a physical therapist recommended in October 2008 that Andrade work part-time, Andrade never requested permission from the City to work less than 40 hours per week. In order for Andrade to be paid instead of having to take leave without pay, the City permitted Andrade to call her supervisor the day she was too ill to work and use vacation time. Andrade never provided a doctor's recommendation to the City that she should work from home due to her medical condition.
Note:	A municipal employer who allowed an employee to miss more than one out of every 10 days of work over a two-year period because of her fibromyalgia and made arrangements for her to work from home, made sufficient accommodation for the worker's disabilities.
Citation:	H037124
WCC Citation:	WCC 39702013 CA

Case Name:	Angelotti v. Walt Disney Company et al.		02/24/2011
Summary:	ANGELOTTI v. WALT DISNEY COMPANY ANTHONY ANGELOTTI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. The court also concluded that The Walt Disney Company (Disney Company) and other defendants owed Angelotti no duty of care. Factual Background Second Mate entered into an agreement with Walt Disney Pictures in which Second Mate agreed to produce and Walt Disney Pictures agreed to finance two movies. Walt Disney Pictures is a subsidiary of Disney Company. Disney Company, Walt Disney Pictures, Buena Vista Productions, Jerry Bruckheimer, Inc. , Golden Oak Ranch Properties, Elliot, Quick, and Rose (collectively Disney defendants) together with Stephan Sports and Stephan filed a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication in November 2008.
Note:	Exclusive remedy barred a stuntman from suing a film production company because substantial evidence showed that it was his special employer, the 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	B219946
WCC Citation:	WCC 37182011 CA

Case Name:	Anguiano v. Ormco Corporation		11/04/2011
Summary:	Plaintiff and appellant Rosalina Anguiano appeals from a summary judgment in favor of defendant and respondent Ormco Corporation. Ormco warned Anguiano that her quality of work was "totally unacceptable" and she needed to reduce her M. R. D. R. s to 2. 5 per month or face further disciplinary action. On October 27, 2006, Ormco gave Anguiano a written warning stating that she had received 52 M. R. D. R. s in the previous 12-month period. She asked Anguiano to go immediately to the medical clinic that Ormco uses for industrial injuries. Rodriguez was not Anguiano's supervisor or an agent of Ormco with respect to Anguiano.
Note:	An employer is not liable for disability discrimination because undisputed evidence showed that it terminated a welder for poor performance.
Citation:	B228600
WCC Citation:	WCC 38212011 CA

Case Name:	Antelope Valley Press v. California Ins. Comissioner		02/26/2008
Summary:	Filed 2/26/08 Antelope Valley Press v. California Ins. This case poses the question whether, for purposes of worker's compensation insurance, persons who make deliveries of newspapers for the newspaper publisher Antelope Valley Press (AVP) are independent contractors or employees. AVP publishes a daily newspaper called the Antelope Valley Press (the Press). It is a magazine-type of publication, is delivered with the Press to subscribers of the Press, and comes out on the last Thursday of the month. The various parts of the Press are all delivered to the same location where the carrier normally picks up the Press.
Note:	[Published as of 4/30/08] The carriers are employees for purposes of workers' compensation law, not independent contractors.
Citation:	B198139
WCC Citation:	WCC 33212008 CA

Case Name:	Antonio Giusto v. City of San Mateo Personnel Board		12/16/2008
Summary:	[U] Giusto v. City of San Mateo Personnel Board, No. A120144 (Cal. App. Dist. 1 12/16/2008) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE No. A120144 December 16, 2008 ANTONIO GIUSTO, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT, v. CITY OF SAN MATEO PERSONNEL BOARD, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT, CITY OF SAN MATEO, REAL PARTY IN INTEREST AND APPELLANT. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. Appellants City of San Mateo Personnel Board (Board) and City of San Mateo (City) seek review of the judgment entered following the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate directing the Board to set aside its decision to terminate the employment of respondent Antonio Giusto. In her letter referring Giusto to Dr. Reynolds, Chief Manheimer provided background information regarding the Department's relationship with Giusto. *fn2 Additionally, Giusto was observed making an obscene gesture during a City Council meeting while a Council member was speaking. (Giusto v. City of San Mateo, A109567 (March 30, 2006) 2006 Cal. App. Unpub.
Note:	The City of San Mateo Personnel Board made no error in law when it terminated a police sergeant who filed a workers' compensation claim for job-related stress, but was found by a psychologist to have a personality disorder because of his inability to accept constructive criticism.
Citation:	A120144
WCC Citation:	WCC 34682008 CA

Case Name:	Appleby v. WCAB		07/29/1994
Summary:	DONALD APPLEBY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PACIFIC BELL, Respondents. Facts and Procedural History On April 18, 1990, applicant Donald Appleby, a splicing technician, injured his left knee while in the course and scope of his employment at defendant Pacific Bell. 2 On November 30, 1992, the WCJ made findings on the issue of the credit, denying the credit to Pacific Bell. 3 Pacific Bell sent a letter to Appleby on June 26, 1990, shortly after his injury, clearly advising him that Pacific Bell intended to recover Plan benefits paid to him from workers' compensation benefits. The Board concluded that applicant Appleby, by accepting benefits from the Plan after receipt of the letter, had thereby waived his right to object to the credit.
Note:	Employer can credit paid private pension benefits against work comp. liabilities.
Citation:	27 Cal.App.4th 184, 59 CCC 520
WCC Citation:	WCC 24521994 CA

Case Name:	Applied Materials v. WCAB (unpublished)		05/07/2021
Summary:	All parties (Applied Materials, Arrowood, XL Specialty, and Worker) petitioned the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) for reconsideration. Arrowood’s petition also names the employer, Applied Materials, as a petitioner. History of Industrial Injuries, Medical Treatment, and Workers’ Compensation Claims Worker began working for Applied Materials in 1996 as an administrative assistant and was eventually promoted to program manager for marketing, communications, and international training programs. (2012) 77 Cal. Comp. Cases 445, 447-448 (Jaramillo) that section 4662 applied to total PD (100 percent) and that section 4660 applied to partial PD (0 percent to 99. 75 percent). 6 [unlike the WCAB’s en banc decisions, WCAB panel decisions are not binding on other WCAB panels or WCJ’s]. )
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that a worker who was sexually exploited by her treating physician was not entitled to a permanent total disability award.
Citation:	No. H047148
WCC Citation:	No. H047148

Case Name:	Arboleda v. WCAB		08/11/1967
Summary:	Moss, J. Mccoy [253 CalApp2d Page 482] Avelino Arboleda, an employee of the Trinidad Hotel in Palm Springs, was killed in an automobile accident on Friday, the 13th of May, 1966. The application of his widow, Dorothy Arboleda, for an award of death benefits was denied by the Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board. There is nothing in the record to indicate that Mr. Arboleda was provided with a place at the hotel to rest during the afternoon [253 CalApp2d Page 488] interval. It cannot be said, therefore, that the shorter advance notice which he received resulted in greater additional risk to him than the five-day notice given to Mr. Arboleda. It is also true that Mr. Schreifer apparently did not report early for work with the same frequency that Mr. Arboleda worked the night shift.
Note:	Commuting to work 2 a day for split shift is not extraordinary for purposes of special mission.
Citation:	253 Cal. App. 2d 481
WCC Citation:	WCC 30461967 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Co. v. IAC		02/08/1961
Summary:	ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and BUDDY D. SHELTON, Respondents. * Argonaut Insurance Company, as compensation carrier for an employer of one Shelton, seeks annulment of two decisions of the Industrial Accident Commission. At the time of the first two injuries applicant was employed by an employer for whom petitioner was the compensation carrier. Argonaut petitioned for reconsideration in proceedings Numbers 59 SBR 2781 and 59 SBR 3327. The commission having granted reconsideration, the findings and award of the referee were not the findings and award of the commission.
Note:	IAC had power to grant recon. of its own decision as to all of consolidated cases.
Citation:	189 Cal.App.2d 23, 26 CCC 40
WCC Citation:	WCC 27001961 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Co. v. IAC (Harries)		12/09/1964
Summary:	ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Petitioners, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and EARLY C. HARRIES, Respondents. * Petitioners, Argonaut Insurance Company and its assured Arntz Brothers, seek annulment of a permanent disability award to Early C. Harries, an employee of Arntz Brothers. Argonaut Insurance Company was the employer's workmen's compensation insurer for the period July 1, 1955, through April 1, 1962. The onset of pain was not sudden and there was no specific incident of pain associated with his employment. Therefore, under the well-known rule applicable to review of Industrial Accident Commission determinations, we are bound by the commission's findings.
Note:	Where employer has more than one insurer, apportionment of liab. is proper.
Citation:	231 Cal.App.2d 111, 29 CCC 279
WCC Citation:	WCC 26311964 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Co. v. IAC (Montana)		05/08/1962
Summary:	ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and FRED MONTANA, Respondents. Describing Montana's preaccident condition, he stated: 'There was some increase in the lumbosacral angle with mild scoliosis. I mean, there was nothing unusual about the x-rays for a man of this build . . . and age. They are not too far away from normal, about what you would expect with his build and age. '[1] Whether a disability results in whole or in part from 'the normal progress of a preexisting disease' (Industrial Indem.
Note:	IAC may use its general knowledge to forecast and weigh facts relevant in compensation award.
Citation:	57 Cal.2d 589, 27 CCC 130
WCC Citation:	WCC 25361962 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Industrial Accident Comm'n		10/11/1963
Summary:	No. 238 October 11, 1963 ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL. , PETITIONERS, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION AND LOLA LEE CUDDY, RESPONDENTS PROCEEDING to review an order of the Industrial Accident Commission awarding compensation for death of claimant's husband. James J. Cuddy died November 10, 1961, as the result of an automobile accident near Shaver Lake in Fresno County. Petitioner Hermreck, Inc. , was insured as to liability for injuries arising under the workmen's compensation laws by petitioner Argonaut Insurance Company. Hearings were held before Referee Rolf V. Gadebusch, of the Industrial Accident Commission, on the claim for a death benefit filed by respondent Lola Lee Cuddy. 2d 509, 513 [159 P. 2d 625], it is said: "The test is stated in Employers' etc. Corp. v. Industrial Acc.
Note:	Injury compensable if sustained while traveling to pick up paycheck at location specified by employer.
Citation:	221 Cal. App. 2d 140
WCC Citation:	WCC 30471963 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Co. v. WCAB (Lopez)		02/22/1971
Summary:	ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and RICHARD LOPEZ, Respondents (Opinion by Fleming, J. , with Herndon, Acting P. J. , and Compton, J. , concurring. )Under this section permanent disability must be apportioned between two injuries producing the disability. [2] However, the board awarded Lopez 11 1/2 percent permanent disability without regard to its prior awards or findings. Nevertheless, the board did not follow the logic of its finding, but instead awarded Lopez compensation for an additional 11 1/2 percent permanent disability. Lopez's employer reported the following hours worked by Lopez during the 12 months which followed his second injury: Tabular Material Omitted
Note:	Insurer entitled to specific finding on amount of PD relied on by WCAB, can controvert finding through legal process.
Citation:	15 Cal.App.3d 436, 36 CCC 89
WCC Citation:	WCC 26491971 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Co. v. WCAB (Thompson)		05/09/1972
Summary:	[n3] Counsel for Argonaut prepared a settlement agreement on a printed WCAB form captioned 'Third Party Compromise and Release. 'On May 11, counsel for Argonaut sent the settlement agreement to WCAB for its approval. After Argonaut petitioned for reconsideration, the WCAB on April 6, 1971, affirmed the referee's action. The second error was committed by Argonaut when it was led into the precise error invited by the WCAB form. By ordering Argonaut, rather than Thompson or Cayocca, to pay the $ 1,404, WCAB attempted to take from Argonaut money which had never been in its hands.
Note:	Settlement of 3rd party liability not set aside for superseding, unsatisfied lien.
Citation:	37 CCC 324
WCC Citation:	WCC 27491972 CA

Case Name:	Argonaut Ins. Exch. v. IAC (Bellinger)		02/14/1958
Summary:	ARGONAUT INSURANCE EXCHANGE, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and M. FRANCES BELLINGER et al. , Respondents. The panel set aside the referee's approval of the compromise and release agreement and substituted its own findings and award. Petitioner first challenges the jurisdiction of respondent commission to annul the referee's order approving the parties' compromise and release agreement. In 1951, the Legislature amended section 115 of the Labor Code so as to grant referees authority to issue original decisions. However, no authority was given to referees to render an original decision approving a compromise or release agreement.
Note:	IAC not required to take further evidence and could redetermine case on existing record.
Citation:	49 Cal.2d 706, 23 CCC 34
WCC Citation:	WCC 26521958 CA

Case Name:	Arkius Inc. v. Hyundae Health Center et al.		09/27/2011
Summary:	ARKIUS, INC. , Plaintiff and Appellant,v. HYUNDAE HEALTH CENTER, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Arkius provided all services pursuant to the agreements but Yeh failed to pay for the work. Arkius filed a complaint alleging causes of action for breach of contract and common counts against several defendants. Defendants called Alex Valles, who had worked for plaintiff on several projects simultaneously, one of which was Ardmore Plaza. Respondents also called Mr. Yeh, who testified he was unaware of any cash payments made to employees working at Ardmore Plaza.
Note:	The license of a general contractor is not suspended by operation of law because it underreported payroll to State Compensation Insurance Fund.
Citation:	B228093
WCC Citation:	WCC 38042011 CA

Case Name:	Arnold v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co.		12/30/2011
Summary:	ARNOLD v. MUTUAL OF OMAHA INSURANCE COMPANY KIMBLY ARNOLD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MUTUAL OF OMAHA INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Kimbly Arnold worked as a nonexclusive insurance agent for Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company (Mutual). During her appointment with Mutual, Arnold did not receive performance evaluations, and he did not monitor or supervise her work schedule. At the time Arnold terminated her appointment in March 2008, she owed Mutual approximately $2,288 for such expenses. Her appointment with Mutual was nonexclusive, and she in fact solicited for other insurance companies during her appointment with Mutual.
Note:	An insurer proved that it was entitled to summary judgment against a worker's suit by proving that she was an independent contractor, a California appellate court ruled in a published decision.
Citation:	A131440
WCC Citation:	WCC 38392011 CA

Case Name:	Arnulfo Aldridge v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority		12/18/2008
Summary:	[U] Aldridge v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, No. B202578 (Cal. App. Dist. 2 12/18/2008) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT No. B202578 December 18, 2008 ARNULFO ALDRIDGE, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Tricia Ann Bigelow, Judge. Raymond G. Fortner, Jr. , County Counsel, and Richard P. Chastang, Deputy County Counsel, for Defendant and Respondent. (Zelig v. County of Los Angeles (2002) 27 Cal. 4th 1112, 1126; see also Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal. 3d 311, 318. )(Williams v. Housing Authority of Los Angeles (2004) 121 Cal. App. 4th 708, 714; see 4 Witkin, Cal.
Note:	A lower court properly dismissed a self-represented worker's fourth attempt to state a proper cause of action against his former employer, which he charged had harassed and fired him after he filed a workers' compensation claim.
Citation:	B202578
WCC Citation:	WCC 34692008 CA

Case Name:	Arp v. WCAB		05/05/1977
Summary:	CHRIS P. ARP, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CHRIS ARP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. , et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Richardson, J. , expressing the unanimous view of the court. )Astrid Arp, petitioner's deceased wife, was an employee of Chris Arp Construction Company, Inc. She was fatally injured in an industrial accident and petitioner applied for and received temporary disability payments accrued by Astrid before her death, and expenses for Astrid's medical care. Astrid Arp earned $6,000 per year as an employee of the construction company wholly owned by her husband. Petitioner asserted a claim for maximum death benefits founded upon the conclusive presumption of section 3501, subdivision (a). Petitioner filed a timely petition for reconsideration with the board, challenging the constitutionality of section 3501's gender-based classification.
Note:	The conclusive presumption of total dependency under section 3501, subdivision (a), is invalid and that, pending action by the Legislature, all applicants must be left to establish proof of dependency under section 3502.
Citation:	19 Cal.3d 395
WCC Citation:	WCC 33881977 CA

Case Name:	Arriaga vs. County of Alameda		04/25/1995
Summary:	LINDA ARRIAGA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA et al. , Defendants and Respondents. (Superior Court of Alameda County, No. 710500-3, James R. Lambden, Judge. )* Linda Arriaga appeals from a judgment dismissing her action for personal injury against respondents County of Alameda (County) and State of California (State). [Arriaga] was assigned by Cal Trans to clean greasy walls of a ventilation duct deep inside the building over the Posey Tube connecting the city of Alameda to Oakland. In each of those cases the person injured was, unlike Arriaga, a county jail inmate at the time of the injury.
Note:	Person convicted of crime but not incarcerated, who performs community service in lieu of paying a fine, is an employee.
Citation:	9 Cal.4th 1055
WCC Citation:	WCC 28761995 CA

Case Name:	Arteaga v. Brink's Inc.		05/28/2008
Summary:	Ruiz also spoke to Arteaga, letting him know that there was an ongoing investigation into the March 1, 2004 variance. At his deposition, Arteaga said he began experiencing these symptoms "[p]robably a year before, two years before" he reported them. But Arteaga concluded that the policy did not apply to him because he was not to blame for his injuries. The physician indicated that Arteaga could return to work without any restrictions and completed a workers' compensation form to that effect. From March 17, 2004 -- when Arteaga first mentioned his symptoms -- to March 23, 2004 -- the day of his termination, Arteaga did not display any difficulty in performing his duties.
Note:	Where the employee relies solely on temporal proximity in response to the employer's evidence of a nonretaliatory reason for termination, he or she does not create a triable issue as to pretext, and summary judgment for the employer is proper.
Citation:	B194082
WCC Citation:	WCC 33742008 CA

Case Name:	Ashdown vs. Ameron Int'l Corp.		08/17/2000
Summary:	ELLEN ASHDOWN, Individually and as Executor, etc. , et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. AMERON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, Defendant and Respondent. This action was brought against respondent Ameron International Corporation (Ameron) by his estate, by and through the decedent's surviving spouse and executor Ellen Ashdown (Ashdown) and his children Kristy Smith and Ian Smith, alleging wrongful death and survival rights of action for negligence, strict liability and loss of consortium caused by his exposure to asbestos during his employment as a pipe inspector for respondent's predecessor company. On April 9, 1997, appellants filed a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint naming Ameron as a defendant, alleging they had failed to name Ameron as a defendant initially because they had only 'recently learned of facts indicating liability of Ameron . Respondent subsequently moved for summary judgment on these grounds, and noticed a hearing to be held on Friday, July 3, 1998. We conclude on the basis of the undisputed evidence that the trial court's grant of summary judgment was correct, and therefore affirm.
Note:	Dual Capacity and Fraudulent Concealment doctrines narrowly construed v. exclusive remedy.
Citation:	83 Cal.App.4th 868, 65 CCC 1026
WCC Citation:	WCC 24172000 CA

Case Name:	Ashley v. WCAB		08/01/1995
Summary:	AUDLEY ASHLEY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION et al. , Respondents. Facts and Procedural History Applicant Audley Ashley, born June 8, 1948, was employed in various clerical capacities with different employers, and developed severe carpal tunnel symptoms in both hands and extremities. While on a banking errand for her employer, the San Luis Obispo YMCA, applicant's vehicle was hit by another car. This employer did not advise applicant of her compensation rights, either, and in addition was uninsured for workers' compensation. The purpose of this section is to overrule the decision in Jensen v. WCAB, 136 Cal. App. 3d 1042 [186 Cal. Rptr.
Note:	Employer need not compensate a worker for a disability from a preexisting perm. disability.
Citation:	37 Cal.App.4th 320, 60 CCC 683
WCC Citation:	WCC 24751995 CA

Case Name:	Astudillo v. Duggleby		09/26/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE JOSE ASTUDILLO et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. KURT DUGGLEBY, Defendant and Appellant. FACTS AND PROCEDURE While working at his landscape job, Jose Astudillo was struck by a car driven by Kurt Duggleby. As part of the settlement, Zurich assigned to Duggleby its $92,787. 56 lien on any judgment Astudillo might obtain against Duggleby. The trial court entered a judgment that recited the jury's verdict, but which stated because Duggleby held the Zurich's lien, Astudillo would have to recover a verdict in excess of $92,787. 56 before Duggleby was obliged to pay anything on the judgment. The judgment then permitted Duggleby to assert the Zurich lien to offset any remaining balance that would otherwise have been owed to Astudillo.
Note:	[Unpublished] It is participation in creating the common fund, or the fund from which a lien may be satisfied, that is relevant to the application of section 3856. Nominal participation is not sufficient and 'the question of whether a party is an active participant in litigation is one of fact for the trial court to decide.
Citation:	G038287, 05CC08248
WCC Citation:	WCC 32612007 CA

Case Name:	Atascadero USD v. WCAB (Geredes)		05/28/2002
Summary:	ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD; CARRIE GEREDES, Respondents. COUNSEL Goldman, Magdalin & Krikes, Kim A. Enriquez, George A. Krikes for Petitioner Atascadero Unified School District. She saw a psychiatrist who diagnosed major depression and found her temporarily totally disabled from October 18 through December 1999. The WCJ found that no compensable psychiatric injury occurred because the gossip concerned a personal matter unrelated to Geredes' employment. We annul the award and remand to the WCAB with directions to withdraw its order granting reconsideration and issue a new order denying Geredes' petition for reconsideration.
Note:	Gossip insufficient to support claim for psychiatric injury.
Citation:	98 Cal.App.4th 880
WCC Citation:	WCC 28552002 CA

Case Name:	Atlantic Richfield Co. v. WCAB		05/20/1982
Summary:	ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CARMAN ARVIZU et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Richardson, J. , with Mosk, Kaus and Broussard, JJ. , and Hastings, J. , concurring. First, in cases in which the surviving spouse is employed, how should partial dependency be determined and death benefits computed?[31 Cal. 3d 720] The Legislature elected not to reinstate the presumption of total dependency, and in 1979 it amended section 3501, removing subdivision (a). Several different approaches have been suggested for determining the appropriate amount of the award to a partial dependent. 'The marital community is something more than the sum of the economic interests of individuals who make it up.
Note:	For partial dependency, widow must establish annual amount of support from husband's earnings.
Citation:	31 Cal.3d 715, 47 CCC 500
WCC Citation:	WCC 25811982 CA

Case Name:	Aubry v. WCAB		07/28/1997
Summary:	LLOYD W. AUBRY, JR. , as Director, etc. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, EDGAR AMORES et al. , Respondents. If the award is not paid by the employer, the award, upon application by the person entitled thereto, shall be paid by UEF. Proper service of the required documents on an employer is essential to the Board's personal jurisdiction of the employer. Comp. Cases 254, establishes that the employer must be served with a copy of the application for adjudication of claim. An application for adjudication was only filed with the Board at any time there was a dispute, i. e. , when trial was required on an issue.
Note:	Service of claim form is proper notice to employer for injuries in years 1990-93.
Citation:	56 Cal.App.4th 1032, 62 CCC 870
WCC Citation:	WCC 24371997 CA

Case Name:	Audiss v. City of Rohnert Park		04/02/2007
Summary:	Wendy Audiss, Applicant v. City of Rohnert Park, Redwood Empire Insurance Fund, Defendants W. C. A. B. No. SRO 0137956--WCAB Panel: Deputy Commissioner Hannigan, Commissioners Caplane, Murray (concurring, but not signing) Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Panel Decision) Opinion Filed April 2, 2007 Opinion By: Deputy Commissioner Dennis J. Hannigan OPINION: OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Defendant, City of Rohnert Park, permissibly self-insured, seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award, issued January 8, 2007, in which a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) awarded applicant, Wendy Audiss, 3% permanent disability and further medical treatment pursuant to the parties' Stipulations with Request for Award. Statement of Facts Applicant sustained an admitted industrial cumulative injury to her right wrist over the period ending October 26, 2005, while employed by the City of Rohnert Park as a Recreation Supervisor. She received medical treatment through the Occupational Health Clinic at Kaiser Permanente in Rohnert Park. AWARD AWARD IS MADE is favor of WENDY AUDISS, and against CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, permissibly self-insured, as follows: A. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD Deputy Commissioner Dennis J. Hannigan I concur, Commissioner Ronnie G. Caplane Commissioner Janice Jamison Murray (concurring, but not signing) ===========Footnotes=========== .
Note:	Defendant is entitled to the benefit of Labor Code section 4658(d)(3)(A), as agreed upon by the parties in their Stipulated Award.
Citation:	SRO 0137956
WCC Citation:	WCC 34392007 CA

Case Name:	Avalon Bay Foods v. WCAB		08/20/1998
Summary:	Avalon Bay Foods v. Workers' Comp. AVALON BAY FOODS et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and ROBERT MOORE, Respondents. For that reason, they are subject to the 60-day time limit for payment applicable to other medical treatment benefits. I In February 1995, petitioner Robert Moore, while employed as a food production worker for Avalon Bay Foods, suffered injury to his left leg ultimately resulting in amputation below the knee. The workers' compensation judge ruled that ITT Hartford unreasonably delayed payment of the medical treatment transportation benefit.
Note:	No penalty if reimbursable medical expense paid within 60 days of receipt.
Citation:	18 Cal.4th 1165, 63 CCC 902
WCC Citation:	WCC 3951998 CA

Case Name:	Aveni v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners		01/24/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) No. C052955 January 24, 2008 MICHAEL D. AVENI, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. The Board of Chiropractic Examiners (the Board) brought a disciplinary action against Michael Aveni, D. C. , alleging unprofessional conduct and sexual misconduct in the treatment of several female patients. *fn1 In response to the allegations, Aveni wrote a letter to the investigator for the Board, denying any inappropriate behavior. One day she invited Aveni and his wife over for lunch so a neighbor could give them massages. S. F. was hoping Aveni would hire the neighbor. Further, Carlisle would confirm C. K. did not complain about Aveni and Carlisle subsequently referred clients to Aveni, showing his trust and confidence in Aveni.
Note:	An incorrect interpretation of the law arrived at by the application of an incorrect legal theory cannot invalidate an administrative determination otherwise correct in result.
Citation:	C052955
WCC Citation:	WCC 33062008 CA

Case Name:	Avila v. WCAB		12/30/1970
Summary:	LEONIDES AVILA, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, B. S. BAINS et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Friedman, J. , with Pierce, P. J. , and Janes, J. , concurring. )1 Before the accident Mr. Avila, the applicant, had a permanent deformity of the right hip and leg as the result of an inflammatory disease during childhood. Nevertheless, he made a living as a farm laborer, picking and thinning fruit and ground crops and pruning trees. His hip and leg condition appears to have been stationary; at least, there is no evidence that it was progressive. [1a] Mr. Avila claims that his condition before the accident did not disable him from pursuing his occupation; thus, that this is a 'lighting up' [14 Cal. App. 3d 37] case, chargeable entirely to the job in which the accident occurred.
Note:	PD when impairment of earning capacity or normal use of a member, or handicap in labor mkt.
Citation:	14 Cal.App.3d 33, 35 CCC 637
WCC Citation:	WCC 25111970 CA

Case Name:	Avila-Gonzalez v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board		10/07/2010
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO No. A126429 October 7, 2010 ARMANDO AVILA-GONZALEZ, PETITIONER, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND BARRETT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC. , RESPONDENTS. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. Petitioner Armando Avila-Gonzalez petitions for review of an order by a divided panel of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board). In many instances, the 2005 PDRS reduces the amount of compensation a worker will receive for a permanent disability. In its opinion, the Board also stated that Dr. Taylor's November 2004 report was "not an indication of permanent disability. "If so, the Board should apply the 1997 PDRS; if not, the Board should apply the 2005 PDRS.
Note:	Faced with conflicting case law about what needs to be present in a doctor's report for the 1997 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule to apply, the 1st District Court of Appeal on Thursday sided with the Genlyte decision and remanded back to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board for a decision about whether a medical report written before 2005 stated that the applicant was permanently disabled.
Citation:	A126429
WCC Citation:	WCC 36762010 CA

Case Name:	Ayala et al. v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc.		09/19/2012
Summary:	Maria Ayala et al v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc B235484 /19/2012 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR September 19, 2012 MARIA AYALA ET AL. , PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLANTS, v. ANTELOPE VALLEY NEWSPAPERS, INC. , DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. Plaintiffs Maria Ayala, Rosa Duran, and Osman Nunez appeal from an order denying their motion for class certification. Code, § 1174); and (8) violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 (based upon the alleged violations of the Labor Code). The complaint alleges that AVP publishes the Antelope Valley Press, a general circulation newspaper that is distributed under the auspices of AVP. In addition to the daily newspaper AVP publishes, the agreements require carriers to deliver a weekly publication, the Antelope Valley Express.
Note:	A group of newspaper home delivery carriers were entitled to assert a class action against their employer based on their alleged misclassification as independent contractors.
Citation:	B235484
WCC Citation:	WCC 39422012 CA

Case Name:	Babbitt v. Ow Jing dba National Market and Golden Eagle Insurance Co.		01/24/2007
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. STK 0174793 OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) SHARON BABBITT, Applicant, vs. OW JING dba NATIONAL MARKET; and GOLDEN EAGLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants. *fn 2* BACKGROUND Applicant, Sharon Babbitt, sustained admitted industrial injury to her back and neck on July 1, 1999, while employed as a stock clerk by Ow Jing, doing business as National Market, and insured by Golden Eagle Insurance Company. On June 5, 2006, applicant filed a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed to Expedited Hearing regarding her entitlement to medical treatment. In the instant case the additional year was in fact provided, thus there is no impediment to transfer to the MPN. An Employer Or Insurer May Satisfy Its Obligation To Provide Reasonable Medical Treatment Under Section 4600 Through An Authorized MPN.
Note:	A defendant may satisfy its obligation under Labor Code section 4600 to provide reasonable medical treatment by transferring an injured worker into an MPN in conformity with applicable statutes and regulations regardless of the date of injury or the date of an award of future medical treatment.
Citation:	STK 0174793
WCC Citation:	WCC 32082007 CA

Case Name:	Badillo v. Abc Industries, Inc. et al.		03/16/2012
Summary:	Leticia Marin Badillo v. Abc Industries, Inc. et al. No. B227714 (Cal. App. Dist. 2 03/16/2012) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE March 16, 2012 LETICIA MARIN BADILLO, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. ABC INDUSTRIES, INC. Plaintiff alleges she was employed for eight years as a janitor, assigned to work at the Century Plaza Towers facilities. On January 26, 2004, defendant's district manager, Eliseo Gutierrez, terminated plaintiff's employment for excessive absenteeism with approval from Mr. Bassin. On March 22, 2006, plaintiff was suspended pending Mr. Martinez's investigation of whether she had falsified her sign-in log sheets. Defendants, ABM Industries Incorporated, ABM Janitorial Services -- Southwest Inc. , are to recover their costs on appeal from plaintiff, Leticia Marin Badillo.
Note:	A janitor who was hired and fired by the same company on three different occasions was time-barred from asserting her claims of harassment, retaliation, disability discrimination, wrongful termination and violation of the Family Rights Act.
Citation:	B227714
WCC Citation:	WCC 38752012 CA

Case Name:	Bagatti v. Dept. of Rehab		04/02/2002
Summary:	MARILYN BAGATTI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiff, Marilyn Bagatti, is and at all times hereinafter mentioned was a resident of Sacramento County, California. The reviewing court gives the complaint a reasonable interpretation, and treats the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded. Plaintiff Has Pleaded a Valid Cause of Action for Damages Caused by an Unlawful Employment Practice Under the FEHA. Plaintiff first contends she has adequately pleaded that she suffers from a physical disability within the meaning of the FEHA.
Note:	FEHA suit is not barred by exclusive remedy doctrine.
Citation:	97 Cal.App.4th 344
WCC Citation:	WCC 28462002 CA

Case Name:	Baglione v. Hertz Car Sales		04/06/2007
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. SJO 0251644 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) JOSEPH BAGLIONE, Applicant, vs. HERTZ CAR SALES; AIG; and CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES (Adjusting Agent), Defendant. Defendant, being newly aggrieved, seeks reconsideration of the en banc decision issued by the Appeals Board on January 24, 2007. (E. g. , People v. Wright (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 367, 382-383; In re Raphael P. (2002) 97 Cal. App. 4th 716, 722. )Accordingly, we are free to reconsider our prior en banc decision and to reach a different conclusion. However, this change of Appeals Board members does not affect our ability to reconsider that en banc decision.
Note:	For the 1997 Schedule to apply under section 4660(d), the existence of permanent disability must be indicated in either a pre-2005 comprehensive medical-legal report or a pre-2005 report from a treating physician.
Citation:	72 CCC 444
WCC Citation:	WCC 32142007 CA

Case Name:	Baglione v. Hertz Car Sales and AIG		01/24/2007
Summary:	See Baglione v. Hertz Car Sales (04/06/07) WCC Citation: WCC 32142007 CA. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. SJO 0251644 OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) JOSEPH BAGLIONE, Applicant, vs. HERTZ CAR SALES, and AIG, Adjusted by CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, Defendant(s). )*fn 4* In Aldi v. Carr, McClellan, Ingersoll, Thompson & Horn (2006) 71 Cal. Comp. Cases 783 (Board en banc), writ den. To properly construe this provision, it is only necessary to apply a longstanding rule of statutory construction: the last antecedent rule. AWARD AWARD IS MADE in favor of JOSEPH BAGLIONE, against HERTZ CAR SALES and AIG, adjusted by CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES, of: (a) Further medical treatment reasonably required to cure or relieve from the effects of the injury to the low back.
Note:	The PDRS that was in effect at the time of the comprehensive medical-legal report is applicable.
Citation:	72 CCC 86
WCC Citation:	WCC 32072007 CA

Case Name:	Bailey v. Reliance Ins. Co.		03/28/2000
Summary:	STEPHEN S. BAILEY et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. OPINION CURRY, J. - Appellants Stephen S. and Jeannette Bailey settled a personal injury action with the driver of a car who injured Mr. Bailey and the driver's employer. Under the terms of the settlement, Mrs. Bailey was to receive $200,000 for loss of consortium, and Mr. Bailey was to receive nothing for his personal injury claim. If, as is often the case, Mr. Bailey requires additional medical treatment or rehabilitation services, he may seek additional benefits from Reliance. To the contrary, those defendants owed an independent obligation to Reliance to reimburse it for amounts paid on behalf of Mr. Bailey.
Note:	Employer's settlement of past benefits in 3rd party case does not defeat credit against future benefits.
Citation:	79 Cal.App.4th 449, 65 CCC 375
WCC Citation:	WCC 23872000 CA