Case Name:	County of Riverside v. WCAB (Taylor)		12/14/2012
Summary:	COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, Petitioner, v.THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and SANDIE TAYLOR, Respondents. STATEMENT OF FACTS Applicant was a member of a group known as the "Mounted Posse Program" established by the Sheriff of Riverside County. Membership in, and the duties of, the posse are extensively prescribed in a manual prepared by the County. (Logoed shirts and caps were provided by the County, but members otherwise provided their own clothing and tack. )*fn2 Applicant testified that it was usual for the County to pay for training, although this was not universal.
Note:	The County of Riverside is not liable for benefits to a volunteer member of its mounted posse program.
Citation:	E055965
WCC Citation:	WCC 39532012 CA

Case Name:	County of Sacramento v. WCAB (Brooks)		04/22/2013
Summary:	COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and MICHAEL BROOKS, Respondents. The County filed a petition for writ of review, and we order issuance of the writ. According to the County, the evidence does not support Dr.Allen's attempt to apportion the injury to the various causes. (Larch v.Contra Costa County (1998) 63 Cal. Comp. Cases 831, 833-839; Stockman v.State of California/Department of Corr. Additional procedure and evidence, especially with respect to the causation issue, are discussed in connection with the contentions of the County of Sacramento (the County).
Note:	California's 3rd District Court of Appeal on Monday overturned an administrative decision that a county's good faith personnel action was not a substantial cause of an applicant's psyche claim.
Citation:	C067739
WCC Citation:	WCC 40042013 CA

Case Name:	County of Sacramento v. WCAB (Estrada)		01/07/1999
Summary:	COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PAMELA ESTRADA, Respondents. OPINION NICHOLSON, J. - The County of Sacramento sought a writ of review in this court after the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (the Board) upheld the award of temporary benefits to respondent Pamela Estrada. 1 In March 1992, Estrada was employed by the county as a work project inmate and injured her back on the job. The county, however, objected to this procedure because, by statute, discovery closed on the date of the settlement conference. In addition, she found that the report of Dr.Michael Kasman, submitted by the county, was inadmissible because the county was not entitled to a rebuttal QME.
Note:	WCAB violated 5502(d)(3) by allowing record to remain open to get supp. medical report.
Citation:	68 Cal.App.4th 1429
WCC Citation:	WCC 24561999 CA

Case Name:	County of Sacramento v. WCAB (Estrada)		01/07/1999
Summary:	COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PAMELA ESTRADA, Respondents. OPINION NICHOLSON, J. - The County of Sacramento sought a writ of review in this court after the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (the Board) upheld the award of temporary benefits to respondent Pamela Estrada. 1 In March 1992, Estrada was employed by the county as a work project inmate and injured her back on the job. The county, however, objected to this procedure because, by statute, discovery closed on the date of the settlement conference. In addition, she found that the report of Dr.Michael Kasman, submitted by the county, was inadmissible because the county was not entitled to a rebuttal QME.
Note:	Judge improperly left open discovery to get supp. med. report after MSC.
Citation:	68 Cal.App.4th 1429, 64 CCC 26
WCC Citation:	WCC 25501999 CA

Case Name:	County of Sacramento v. WCAB (McCartney)		07/11/2017
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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT .             COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, .             v..             WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JONATHON SCOTT MCCARTNEY, Respondents. .             McCartney was diagnosed with actinic keratosis in October 2013. .           In this case, the qualified medical examiner (QME) testified to the following, among other things: .           1. .           MAURO , J.McCartney’s employing entity is a County subdivision (“County of Sacramento Contracts”); as his counsel put it, “It’s a technical thing. )Â
Note:
Citation:	C082282
WCC Citation:	WCAB No. ADJ9510323

Case Name:	County of Sacramento v. WCAB (Weatherall)		01/11/2000
Summary:	COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND GLENNIS WEATHERALL, etc. , Respondents. After a June 14, 1995, claim for benefits on behalf of the widow and minor daughter was filed, Sacramento County (County) raised statute of limitation issues and the parties disputed whether a 'cumulative' injury had been pleaded. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) issued a decision finding in part death was not 'due to a specific job event. ''This trial judge approached the issues in this case from the factual basis established in part by the parties stipulations. (d)(2); see County of Sacramento v.Workers' Comp.
Note:	Board must have Good Cause to set aside stipulations of parties.
Citation:	77 Cal. App. 4th 1114, 65 CCC 1
WCC Citation:	WCC 3972000 CA

Case Name:	County of San Bernardino v. WCAB		10/04/2007
Summary:	Filed 10/4/07 County of San Bernardino v.WCAB CA4/2 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 FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and ROBERT SCHROEDER, Respondents. Ruth E.Stringer, Acting County Counsel, and Sandra Grajeda, Deputy County Counsel for Petitioner. Petitioner County of San Bernardino (County), as the affected employer, seeks review and annulment of an order of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) affirming the award in favor of applicant Robert Schroeder (applicant). FACTS Applicant was employed as a firefighter and later as a battalion chief by the County of San Bernardino from 1969 until November 7, 1999, his last day on the job.
Note:	[Unpublished] Successive, specific industrial injuries to different parts of the body cannot be rated together simply because they share one date of injury.
Citation:	E041757
WCC Citation:	WCC 32652007 CA

Case Name:	County of San Bernardino v. WCAB (McCoy)		02/29/2012
Summary:	COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JOHN McCOY, Respondents. Jean-Rene Basle, County Counsel, and Eric K.Yee, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner. County of San Bernardino (County) contends that the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) erred when it awarded benefits to John McCoy for migraine headaches he suffered. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND McCoy worked as an automated systems technician for the County. The workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found that the injuries were not compensable as argued by County.
Note:	An employer's use of the good faith personnel action defense in Labor Code 3208.3 barred a technician's claim for migraine headaches.
Citation:	E053173
WCC Citation:	WCC 38642012 CA

Case Name:	County of San Diego v. WCAB (Pike)		03/06/2018
Summary:	Filed 3/68 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, Petitioner, .             v..             WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and KYLE PIKE, Respondents. .             D072648 .             (WCAB No.ADJ7811907) .             Petition for writ of review from an order of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. .             Thomas E.Montgomery, County Counsel, and David E.Shamsky, Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner. D.The County's petition for reconsideration .           The County filed a petition for reconsideration. .           WE CONCUR: .           HUFFMAN, Acting P.J.
Note:
Citation:	D072648
WCC Citation:	WCAB No. ADJ7811907

Case Name:	County of San Joaquin v. WCAB and James Davis		02/27/2006
Summary:	STK164337 & STK164334) COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JAMES DAVIS, Respondents. The County of San Joaquin (County) petitions this court for a writ of review of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's (Board) decision that James Davis (Davis) is a maximum wage earner for purposes of calculating his temporary and permanent disability indemnity benefits. Fifty-five year-old Davis was employed as an attorney at State Fund and paid a monthly salary of $7,299. Subdivision (c)(2) contemplates an hourly rate of pay and neither the County nor State Fund paid Davis an hourly rate. Here, there were no "aggregate earnings" because as a state worker,*fn 6* Davis did not earn wages from the County.
Note:	An attorney injured in the course of his jury duty was properly compensated at an amount reflecting his maximum earning capacity, rather than the $5 per day wage for jury duty.
Citation:	147 Cal. App. 4th 1459
WCC Citation:	WCC 32092006 CA

Case Name:	County of San Joaquin vs. WCAB (Sepulveda)		04/21/2004
Summary:	COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN et al. , Petitioners, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD et al. , Respondents. Paragraph 6 recites "PERMANENT DISABILITY INDEMNITY" of $2,442. 87 will be deducted, "LEAVING A BALANCE of $ $21,55713, less approved attorney fee . Vons Companies, Inc.v.WCAB (1998) 63 Cal. Comp. Cases 276 (Vons) is a Court of Appeal opinion not published in the California Official Reports. DISPOSITION The WCAB decision is annulled and the cause is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion. County of San Joaquin shall recover costs on this appeal.
Note:	Carrier may take credit for PDAs not specifically set forth in C&R.
Citation:	117 Cal.App.4th 1180
WCC Citation:	WCC 29842004 CA

Case Name:	County of San Luis Obispo v. WCAB (Martinez)		09/29/2005
Summary:	The County of San Luis Obispo (County) petitions for a writ of review to determine the lawfulness of a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) finding the County discriminated against its employee, Art Martinez, for sustaining a work-related injury. )*fn1 The County contends it permissibly took Martinez off work because his medical restrictions were inconsistent with the requirements of his job. Based on Dr.Kissel's revised opinion, the County permitted Martinez to return to work on February 23, 2003. The WCAB also erred by focusing on what the County knew at the time it returned Martinez to work. The WCAB also found discrimination because the County did not obtain an additional medical opinion before it terminated Martinez.
Note:	To establish discrimination, an employee must show that he was singled out for disadvantageous treatment because of his injury.
Citation:	133 Cal. App. 4th 641
WCC Citation:	WCC 31272005 CA

Case Name:	County of San Mateo v. WCAB		07/13/1982
Summary:	COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, Petitioner, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and WENDY R.WARREN, Respondents. This petition by the County of San Mateo challenges an award of enhanced disability benefits granted under the authority of Labor Code section 4850.fn. The county paid temporary disability benefits, but at the normal rate of $154 per week, not at a rate equal to Ms.Warren's salary. Petitioner relies heavily upon the decision in Collins v.County of Los Angeles (1976) 55 Cal. App. 3d 594 [126 Cal. Rptr.541]. He sought writ of mandate to compel the county to pay him his full salary in lieu of temporary disability payments.
Note:	Not entitled to full salary leave of absence when injury occurred after nonmedical resignation.
Citation:	133 Cal.App.3d 737, 47 CCC 739
WCC Citation:	WCC 26791982 CA

Case Name:	County of Ventura v. WCAB		10/04/1993
Summary:	County of Ventura, Petitioner v.Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California, Evangelina Anaya, et al. , Respondents. County asserts that the WCAB should have ordered Dr.Sanchez to reimburse County for at least 75 percent and possibly 100 percent of the temporary disability indemnity and past medical treatment costs for which County paid. n2 The WCAB case number for the application against County is VEN 78908. n4 As previously noted, WCAB case No.VEN 78908 is the case against County. n5 As previously noted, WCAB case No.VEN 78908 is the case against County.
Note:	Right to arbitration on 'contribution' issues is waived if not timely raised.
Citation:	58 CCC 649
WCC Citation:	WCC 26251993 CA

Case Name:	Courtney v. City of Redondo Beach		02/27/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT TERI COURTNEY et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v.CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, Defendant and Respondent. Teri Courtney and Lillian Ballinger were long-term employees who worked for the City of Redondo Beach in its police department as jailers. In accordance with Dr.Berman's conclusions, the City asked Courtney to return to work on March 4, 2003. In December 2004, Courtney, Ballinger, Jo Ellen Latham (an identification technician for the police department), and Elizabeth Blatt filed this lawsuit against the City of Redondo Beach, alleging numerous violations of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The City of Redondo Beach is to recover its costs on appeal.
Note:	[Unpublished] The City did not violate its legal duty to reassign Plaintiffs to another equivalent job for which they were qualified because the evidence showed no such positions were available when they were terminated.
Citation:	B192927
WCC Citation:	WCC 33222008 CA

Case Name:	Cox v. San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Dept.		03/28/2012
Summary:	EDWARD COX, Plaintiff and Appellant, v.SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Edward Cox appeals a summary judgment granted in favor of defendant San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Department (Department). But in his prior deposition, Cox was asked, "Do you believe that your cerebral palsy restricts you from doing things?"That memorandum reflects that Thompson told Cox that he was not performing well and he asked Cox "if there was anything [he] could do to help [Cox] improve. "Cox responded, "No. " Cox claimed Moore unfairly criticized him for making an incorrect time entry on a log.
Note:	A sheriff's deputy terminated during his new-hire probationary period failed to prove his claim of disability discrimination based upon his alleged cerebral palsy.
Citation:	B231260
WCC Citation:	WCC 38792012 CA

Case Name:	Cranford v. City of Huntington Beach		03/02/2012
Summary:	NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION O'LEARY, P.J.Catherine Denise Cranford appeals from the judgment in her action against her former employer, the City of Huntington Beach (the City). Herrera retaliated against Cranford by repeatedly complaining to Miller about Cranford's job performance and constantly confronting Cranford about job-related matters. When Cranford tried to "chastise the officer for violating the prisoner's right of privacy[,]" the officer looked at Cranford "dismissively . Cranford claimed Herrera made a "`preemptive strike'" by telling Miller she was considering filing a complaint against Cranford, which coerced Cranford into not filing a formal complaint against Herrera. There is no evidence the City Attorney had any knowledge of the animosity between Cranford and Herrera, or of any complaints Cranford made to Miller.
Note:	A municipal employer's release of medical information from an employee's workers' compensation claim file did not constitute an adverse employment action for purposes of the state Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Citation:	G043791
WCC Citation:	WCC 38672012 CA

Case Name:	Crawford v. WCAB		06/13/1989
Summary:	Dr.Crawford then petitioned this court for a writ of prohibition restraining further proceedings by the WCAB. 1 An additional 13 counts charge Dr.Crawford with deceit in failing to identify the persons who prepared medical reports and in willfully misrepresenting to the WCAB that Dr.Crawford alone took medical histories and prepared the reports. Another count (35) charges that Dr.Crawford filed false medical reports and liens in two other workers' compensation [213 Cal. App. 3d 163] cases (Robert J.Kelley v.Panama Moving and Storage, WCAB No.85 LA 525604, and Robert J.Kelley v.Goldrich & Kest Management, WCAB Nos. Based on the accusation and accompanying exhibits, the WCAB ordered that Dr.Crawford appear before a WCAB commissioner at a certain time and place and show cause, if any, why he should not be held in contempt pursuant to Labor Code section 134. The WCAB states: 'It is a policy of the [WCAB] to conduct an investigation of all charges of impropriety against persons involved in [WCAB] proceedings before considering whether an order to show cause regarding contempt should issue.
Note:	WCAB has wide latitude in enforcement of contempt findings.
Citation:	213 Cal.App.3d 156, 54 CCC 198
WCC Citation:	WCC 25651989 CA

Case Name:	Creative Environments of Hollywood v. USF Ins. Co.		08/20/2012
Summary:	CREATIVE ENVIRONMENTS OF HOLLYWOOD v.USF INS. CO.CREATIVE ENVIRONMENTS OF HOLLYWOOD et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v.USF INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiffs and appellants Creative Environments of Hollywood and 201 Westmoreland Associates, Ltd.(collectively Contractor), appeals from summary judgments in favor of defendants and respondents USF Insurance Company (Insurer) and its agent Burns & Wilcox, Ltd.(Agent). I dissent as to the summary judgment in favor of USF Insurance Company (USF). Thus, as interpreted by USF, the policy, having a total cost of over $5,000, is almost illusory.
Note:	An insurance carrier had no duty to defend its client from a claim by an injured plumbing subcontractor for maintaining an unsafe work environment since the plain language of its policy specifically excluded coverage for bodily injury to such workers arising out of their employment.
Citation:	B232436
WCC Citation:	WCC 39222012 CA

Case Name:	Criswell v. WCAB		02/20/2009
Summary:	At a July 16, 2008, hearing in which Criswell testified, the WCJ immediately ruled Criswell was entitled to left ankle surgery along with the left knee surgery as described by Dr.Pistel at the County's expense. The WCAB granted the County's petition for reconsideration and in a split decision, the majority disagreed with the WCJ and concluded Criswell failed to meet her burden of proving industrial causation with reasonably probability. Accordingly, the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's order and concluded Criswell wasnot entitled to the left ankle surgery described by Dr.Pistel at defendant's expense. Criswell contends the WCAB majority failed to consider Dr.Pistel's medical opinion that the left ankle surgery would aid her recovery from the industrially related knee surgery in denying the concurrent ankle surgery. While we agree with Criswell that the WCAB provided little reasoning related to this argument, the majority's decision is supported by the medical evidence.
Note:	WCAB's decision not to order surgery supported by substantial evidence and applicant's effective waiver of the issue in adopting a stipulated award.
Citation:	F056510
WCC Citation:	WCC 34942009 CA