Case Name:	Bi-Coastal Payroll Services, Inc. v. CIGA		05/29/2009
Summary:	Plaintiffs believed the reserves set by CIGA were disproportionately high in relation to the age of the individual claims, representing an aggressive reserving policy on the part of CIGA. Plaintiffs also learned that CIGA set substantial reserves to cover incurred but not yet reported losses (IBNR), even though most of the claims being administered by CIGA were several years old. During the same period, CIGA commenced sending demand letters to the various payroll companies seeking direct reimbursement for benefits paid under the Legion policies. Despite CIGA's demand for reimbursement for benefits paid under the Legion policies, CIGA refused to provide meaningful access to the claims files. The named plaintiffs are: Bi-Coastal Payroll Services, Inc. ; Curiosity Payroll Services, Inc. ; Epicurean Services, Inc. ; Emerald Payroll Services, Inc. ; Film Payment Services, Inc. ; FPS Payroll Services, Inc. ; FSI Processing, Inc. ; Maize-El Services, Inc. ; Movie Payroll, Inc. ; Power Payroll, Inc. ; Producer Payroll, Inc. ; Production Processing, Inc. ; Quantos Payroll Service, Inc. ; Radar Payroll Services, Inc. ; Staff Payroll Services, Inc. ; Transcontinental Payroll, Inc. , d. b. a. West Coast Extras, Inc. ; West Coast Extras, Inc. ; X Rhode, Inc. ; Media Services.
Note:	Plaintiffs' duty to file notice of appeal arose from the service of notice of entry of judgment, not the service of the trial court's earlier minute order and that their appeal is therefore timely.
Citation:	B205969
WCC Citation:	WCC 35282009 CA

Case Name:	Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. WCAB and Paul Hunt		10/04/2010
Summary:	BIGGE CRANE & RIGGING CO. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND PAUL HUNT, Respondents. Introduction Respondent Paul Hunt was injured while assisting with the dismantling of a truck crane used during a shutdown operation at a refinery. In January 2002, he was hired by Bigge Crane to operate a 90-ton, Peck & Hiller truck crane at the Chevron refinery job site. In the meantime, Embry told the operator of another crane (an 80-ton truck crane) and Hunt, who was working as the oiler, to go and assist Mom. As Hunt points out, Bigge Crane was cited for violating several safety orders, including orders requiring employee training and the securing or blocking of crane booms.
Note:	Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. WCAB, A127136, (10/04/2010): An employer is not liable for a benefits increase under a
Citation:	A127136
WCC Citation:	WCC 36752010 CA

Case Name:	Biggers v. WCAB		01/21/1999
Summary:	Biggers contends that as a courtroom bailiff, her functions clearly came within the scope of active law enforcement, entitling her to those benefits. At the hearing, Biggers testified she worked as a deputy sheriff; her assignment was courtroom bailiff. The workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found Biggers was not an employee entitled to the benefits of Labor Code section 4850. At the hearing Biggers testified she was hired in 1989; she had been a bailiff for seven years. Based on this additional evidence, the WCJ found Biggers was entitled to benefits under Labor Code section 4850.
Note:	Courtroom bailiff's duties came within scope of active law enforcement.
Citation:	69 Cal.App.4th 431, 64 CCC 19
WCC Citation:	WCC 26871999 CA

Case Name:	Biloy v. WCAB (C.A. Rocha & Sons)		01/03/1975
Summary:	EMEGDIO BILOY, Petitioner v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; C. A. ROCHA & SONS; and PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondents. OPINION: Emegdio Biloy sustained an injury to his back in the scope of his employment as a cook, on April 9, 1969. After a hearing on petitioner's application the referee found that petitioner's temporary disability had lasted until June 26, 1972. The referee noted that it was 'difficult to determine exactly when applicant's condition became permanent, stationary, and ratable. The report stated that Mr. Biloy would be able to return to work on November 1, 1969.
Note:	Evidence in carrier's possession cannot be 'new' evidence absent good showing that ev. was 'undiscoverable'.
Citation:	40 CCC 35
WCC Citation:	WCC 27311975 CA

Case Name:	Bingener v. City of Los Angeles		01/09/2020
Summary:	Filed 12/16/19; Certified for Publication 1/9/20 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             MARK BINGENER et al. ,Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al. ,Defendants and Respondents. .             B291112 .             (Los Angeles County Super. INTRODUCTION .             Mark and Eric Bingener appeal the trial court’s grant of the City of Los Angeles’s (City) motion for summary judgment. * .           We concur: .           LAVIN, Acting P. J. .           EGERTON, J. Filed 1/9/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .           MARK BINGENER et al. ,Plaintiffs and Appellants, .           v. .           CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al. ,Defendantsand Respondents.
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that an employer's knowledge of an employee's compensable injury was not enough to impose tort liability for a fatal car accident.
Citation:	No. B291112
WCC Citation:	No. B291112

Case Name:	Bison Builders Inc. v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp.		09/05/2012
Summary:	BISON BUILDERS INC. v. THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORPORATION BISON BUILDERS, INC. , Cross-Complainant and Appellant, v. THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORPORATION, Cross-Defendant and Respondent. Thyssen was a subcontractor for appellant general contractor Bison Builders, Inc. (Bison) in the construction of a hotel. Bison responded to the proposal with a 15-page form subcontract agreement entitled "Bison Builders, Inc. Subcontract Agreement," dated March 30, 2006. The trial court's instruction on retained control read as follows: "David Travis claims that he was damaged by an unsafe condition while employed by ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corporation and working on Bison Builders, Incorporated's property. To establish this claim, David Travis must prove all of the following: [¶] 1, that Bison Builders, Incorporated controlled the property; 2, that Bison Builders, Incorporated retained control over safety conditions at the work site; 3, that Bison Builders, Incorporated negligently exercised its retained control over safety conditions; 4, that David Travis was damaged; 5, that Bison Builders, Incorporated affirmatively contributed to David Travis' damage.
Note:	A general contractor is liable for its negligent control of a job site that contributed to a worker's spinal cord injury.
Citation:	A131622, A131623
WCC Citation:	WCC 39302012 CA

Case Name:	Blackburn v. WCAB		07/25/2008
Summary:	-ooOoo- *Before Levy, Acting P. J. , Dawson, J. , and Hill, J. Theresa Blackburn petitions this court in propria persona for a writ of review from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Blackburn did not file an Answer, but on February 19, 2008, the WCAB received a one-page letter objecting to FUSD's petition. Having failed to bring any of these issues to the attention of the WCAB on reconsideration, Blackburn has waived the issues before this court. The WCAB instead remanded the matter for further proceedings to determine if Blackburn was entitled to workers' compensation benefits related to her alleged psychological injury. Since Blackburn did not petition for reconsideration from the WCJ's findings and award and all other issues were affirmed by the WCAB, there is no issue before this court to review.
Note:	[Unpublished] Since Blackburn did not petition for reconsideration from the WCJ's findings and award and all other issues were affirmed by the WCAB, there is no issue before this court to review.
Citation:	F055123
WCC Citation:	WCC 34032008 CA

Case Name:	Blackledge v. Bank of America		06/03/2010
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. ADJ1735018 (LBO 0375311) OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION CYNTHIA BLACKLEDGE, Applicant, vs. BANK OF AMERICA; and ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s). BACKGROUND Applicant, Cynthia Blackledge (Blackledge), sustained an admitted industrial injury to her low back and her right wrist, hip, and knee on October 26, 2005 when she slipped while descending a flight of stairs. Dr. Pechman evaluated Blackledge and issued a report on May 14, 2007. Blackledge made a timely request to cross-examine the rater regarding the 0% recommended rating. The expert opinion of a single physician may establish an injured employee's WPI, provided that the opinion constitutes substantial evidence.
Note:	[En Banc] Physician's role is to assess the injured employee's whole person impairment percentage(s); WCJ's role is to frame instructions; rater's role is to issue a recommended permanent disability rating; WCJ is not bound by a rater's disability rating; must be no ex parte communication between the WCJ and the rater.
Citation:	ADJ1735018
WCC Citation:	WCC 36352010 CA

Case Name:	Blanchard v. WCAB		12/09/1975
Summary:	GEORGE M. BLANCHARD, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Kaufman, J. , with Tamura, Acting P. J. , and McDaniel, J. , concurring. )On July 21, 1970, Applicant was awarded permanent disability benefits based on a disability rating of 30 1/2 percent. Petitioner will file herein a medical evaluation report of applicant's condition in support of his petition herein at a later date. '4) or to set forth the facts relied upon to establish new and further disability under Labor Code, section 5410 (Cal. '(b) In all other cases by a petition setting forth specifically the facts relied upon to establish new and further disability. '
Note:	Faulty petition to reopen valid when it gives notice of being based on alleged increased disability.
Citation:	53 CA 3d 590, 40 CCC 784
WCC Citation:	WCC 27711975 CA

Case Name:	Bland v. WCAB		10/26/1970
Summary:	BLAND, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, McPHAIL'S, INC. , et al. , Respondents. Although the board remained convinced that petitioner's condition was not yet permanent and stationary, it refused to award compensation for his temporary disability. Labor Code section 5803 provides that the board 'has continuing jurisdiction over all its orders, decisions, and awards. . . . 13. 13, at p. 409; 1 Hanna, Form 7. 1 (WCAB Form 42). )We have fully demonstrated that the petition to reopen in this case necessarily comprehended a request for temporary disability compensation.
Note:	Awkwardness in allegation does not restrict worker's right to compensation; Petition to Reopen need not request particular classification of compensation.
Citation:	3 Cal.3d 324, 35 CCC 513
WCC Citation:	WCC 26431970 CA