Case Name:	Gomez v. Sharon Baptist Bd. of Directors, Inc.		10/28/2008
Summary:	Gomez v Sharon Baptist Bd. 23476/04 84824/05 [*1]Geraldo Gomez, et al. , Plaintiffs, v Sharon Baptist Board of Directors, Inc. , Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, S. M. Construction Co. , Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. ), entered February 27, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, denied the cross motion of defendant/third-party plaintiff Sharon Baptist Board of Directors, Inc. (Sharon Baptist) for summary judgment on its claim for contractual indemnification against third-party defendant S. M. Construction Co. (SMC), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Plaintiff Gomez, an employee of SMC, was injured as a result of falling from a scaffold that shifted as he performed SMC's work on premises owned by Sharon Baptist. Supreme Court correctly denied Sharon Baptist summary judgment against SMC based in its indemnification claim.
Note:	There has been no finding that either SMC or its agents were negligent let alone that such negligence proximately caused plaintiff's injuries. Accordingly, summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim is premature.
Citation:	4229 23476/04 84824/05
WCC Citation:	WCC 34412008 CA

Case Name:	Gomez vs. Casa Sandoval; Nokes vs. Placer Savings		05/27/2003
Summary:	OAK 234515; OAK 239085; OAK 240882 CAROL NOKES, Applicant, VS. PLACER SAVINGS BANK; FREMONT COMPENSATION INSURANCE COMPANY; PAULA INSURANCE COMPANY (IN LIQUIDATION); CALIFORNIA COMPENSATION (IN LIQUIDATION); CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION; DEFENDANTS. SAC 289506; SAC 289507 The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) granted reconsideration to further study the record in these two cases. "Case OAK 234515 for cumulative trauma period from August 1988 to December 8, 1995, wherein California Compensation/CIGA is the only defendant. Since the apportionment of liability has been reduced to a final judgment, CIGA remains liable for the now-insolvent carrier's already-established liability. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, as the Decision After Reconsideration of the Board (En Banc) in Nokes v. Placer Savings Bank (SAC 289506, 289507), that the Findings, Award and Order of July 24, 2002 is hereby AFFIRMED.
Note:	Limitations on CIGA liability where mix of solvent and insolvent carriers.
Citation:	68 CCC (2003) (En Banc)
WCC Citation:	WCC 29362003 CA

Case Name:	Goni Enterprises v. Dept. of Industrial Relations		04/10/2018
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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             GONI ENTERPRISES, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT, Defendant and Respondent. .             B277670 .             Los Angeles County Super. .             California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement and Edna Garcia Earley for Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION .             In November 2013, the Office of the State Labor Commissioner (Commissioner) within the California Department of Industrial Relations (Department) cited plaintiff Goni Enterprises, Inc. (Goni) for failing to secure workers’ compensation insurance for its employees. .           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS .           LAVIN, J.
Note:	A California Appellate Court ruled that an employer could not challenge a lien against its property, imposed because of failure to secure workers’ compensation insurance for its employees, since it had not followed the proper process to challenge a stop order and penalty assessment.
Citation:	B277670
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NC059643

Case Name:	Gonzales v. WCAB		12/22/1998
Summary:	CONNIE GONZALES, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HUNT-WESSON, INC. , Respondents. She petitioned this court for a writ of review of the board's decision [68 Cal. App. 4th 846] on this narrow legal issue. She stipulated she did not have any plans to look for work elsewhere once retired from the employ of Hunt-Wesson, Inc. The referee issued a report finding the petitioner's average weekly earnings for purposes of temporary disability were zero after August 10. 'Average weekly earnings' are determined for both temporary and permanent disability payments according to various provisions of section 4453.
Note:	Worker not entitled to TTD after date of retirement because no earning capacity.
Citation:	68 Cal.App.4th 843, 63 CCC 1477
WCC Citation:	WCC 24891998 CA

Case Name:	Gonzalez v. ATI Systems International		05/20/2011
Summary:	GONZALEZ v. ATI SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. ROLAND GONZALEZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ATI SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. On September 15, 2005, Gonzalez provided ATI with a note from his doctor stating, "Roland Gonzalez is under my care for a serious cardiovascular condition and is temporarily disabled. ATI stated that it had no information as to when, or even if, Gonzalez would be able to return to work. ATI argued that Gonzalez never gave notice that he was eligible to return to work under certain circumstances, and therefore, ATI was not required to engage in an interactive process. In this case, ATI presented evidence that granting Gonzalez an additional unpaid leave of absence would have caused ATI undue hardship.
Note:	An accountant who was fired after he used all the 12 weeks of unpaid leave allowed to him while recovering from a surgery has a valid discrimination claim that should go to trial, the California 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	B223779
WCC Citation:	WCC 37642011 CA

Case Name:	Gonzalez v. Luzaich Striping, Inc.		04/10/2008
Summary:	INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Ruben Gonzalez appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendants Luzaich Striping, Inc. and Bruce Freebury (jointly LSI). Freebury personally informed Gonzalez that he was being laid off, and told Gonzalez that he was being let go because "work was slow. "Freebury did not give Gonzalez his final paycheck at the time he informed Gonzalez he was being dismissed. After Gonzalez filed this lawsuit, Luzaich asked an office assistant to prepare a worksheet setting forth Gonzalez's absences during his employment with LSI. Luzaich also offered a "worksheet that [he] had prepared after Mr. Gonzalez presented his claim in this matter" that Luzaich believed "confirmed [his] understanding upon laying [Gonzalez] off that he had a poor attendance record. "
Note:	[Unpublished] Plaintiff does not claim on appeal that he was improperly terminated because of his alleged disability. Rather, plaintiff contends that it is employer's failure to rehire and/or failure to accommodate him in the rehiring process that represents the actionable disability discrimination. This argument is meritless.
Citation:	D050693
WCC Citation:	WCC 33392008 CA

Case Name:	Gonzalez v. WCAB (Hunt Wesson)		12/22/1998
Summary:	She petitioned this court for a writ of review of the board's decision [68 Cal. App. 4th 846] on this narrow legal issue. She stipulated she did not have any plans to look for work elsewhere once retired from the employ of Hunt-Wesson, Inc. The referee issued a report finding the petitioner's average weekly earnings for purposes of temporary disability were zero after August 10. 'Average weekly earnings' are determined for both temporary and permanent disability payments according to various provisions of section 4453. (1947) 79 Cal. App. 2d 711, 722 [180 P. 2d 972] [earning capacity is 'touchstone' in determining average earnings]. )
Note:	Applicant not entitled to TTD after date of retirement (NOTE: distinguishing cases cited within opinion).
Citation:	68 Cal.App.4th 843
WCC Citation:	WCC 28191998 CA

Case Name:	Gordon v. Symantec Corp.		10/17/2011
Summary:	INTRODUCTION Appellant Sarah Gordon was employed by respondent Symantec Corporation (Symantec) from 2004 until November 2007, when she was terminated from her position as senior principal engineer. Gordon filed a wrongful termination action against Symantec alleging that Symantec's decision to terminate her was based upon her physical disability, which Symantec had accommodated by allowing her to fly business class on flights longer than three hours. For the reasons stated below, we determine that Symantec met its burden on summary judgment to show legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for terminating Gordon. Gordon continued to work for Symantec as a contractor until 2004, when she accepted Weafer's offer of employment with Symantec as a senior principal research engineer. While working for Symantec as an employee and as a contractor, Gordon lived in Florida and worked from her home.
Note:	A disabled senior principal research engineer did not present enough evidence for a court to conclude that her employer terminated her because of her disability.
Citation:	H036239
WCC Citation:	WCC 38112011 CA

Case Name:	Gorman v. WCAB		07/19/1982
Summary:	RICHARD GORMAN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE et al. , Respondents. Richard Gorman (petitioner) was employed as a police officer by the City of San Clemente from 1973 through May 23, 1979. It was adjudicated in 1980 that petitioner had suffered several industrial injuries resulting in permanent partial disability. The Rehabilitation Bureau ordered the defendants to pay temporary disability indemnity pursuant to subdivision (c) of section 139. 5. Defendants appealed to the Board, and both the WCAB trial judge and the Board ruled that the petitioner's right to temporary disability benefits under the Workers' Compensation Act terminated pursuant to section 4853 fn.
Note:	Retired policeman not eligible to continue receiving rehab. TD indemnity.
Citation:	133 Cal.App.3d 998, 47 CCC 745
WCC Citation:	WCC 27031982 CA

Case Name:	Gourley v. City of Napa		03/18/1975
Summary:	OSMER B. GOURLEY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CITY OF NAPA, Defendant and Respondent (Opinion by Taylor, P. J. , with Kane and Rouse, JJ. , concurring. )Richard L. Knickerbocker, City Attorney (Santa Monica), Rosario Perry, Deputy City Attorney, Chalmers E. Lones, City Attorney (Signal Hill), Warren J. Lynch, City Attorney (Salinas), and Raymond M. Haight, Assistant City Attorney, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent. Pursuant to this statute, the temporary disability payments that would otherwise have been payable to Gourley by the city's workmen's compensation insurer were paid to the city. Upon receipt of this notification, the city terminated payments to Gourley under Labor Code section 4850 and applied to the PERS for disability retirement of Gourley to be effective July 1, 1972. On July 11, 1972, Gourley's attorney wrote to PERS stating that Gourley did not consent to the retirement date sought by the city.
Note:	Fireman cannot be retired with PD benefits and still be receiving full salary with leave of absence.
Citation:	48 Cal.App.3d 156, 40 CCC 888
WCC Citation:	WCC 26901975 CA

Case Name:	Government Code 31720.7 - Blood Borne Disease		12/27/2001
Summary:	The disease so developing or manifesting itself in those cases shall in no case be attributed to any disease existing prior to that development or manifestation. (b) Any safety member, firefighter, county probation officer, or member active in law enforcement described in subdivision (a) permanently incapacitated for the performance of duty as a result of a blood-borne infectious disease shall receive a service-connected disability retirement. (c) The presumption described in subdivision (a) is rebuttable by other evidence. Unless so rebutted, the board is bound to find in accordance with the presumption. (d) -Blood-borne infectious disease,-for purposes of this section, means a disease caused by exposure to pathogenic microorganisms that are present in human blood that can cause disease in humans, including, but not limited to, those pathogenic microorganisms defined as blood-borne pathogens by the Department of Industrial Relations.
Note:	Presumption of industrial causation of blood-borne infectious disease.
Citation:	Gov Code 31720.7
WCC Citation:	WCC 28302001 CA

Case Name:	Graczyk v. WCAB		08/08/1986
Summary:	RICKY D. GRACZYK, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FULLERTON et al. , Respondents. The Board granted reconsideration and found (in a two-to-one decision) that applicant was not an employee of CSUF. Com. , supra, 219 Cal. App. 2d 457, and hence he could not be deprived of it retroactively by the Legislature's 1981 amendment to section 3352. To determine whether applicant had a vested right of action, we must look to the unique nature of the workers' compensation law in California. Workers' Compensation Practice (Cont. Ed. Bar 1985) § 1. 3, p. 4; see Lowman v. Stafford (1964) 226 Cal. App. 2d 31, 36 [37 Cal. Rptr.
Note:	Scholarship athletes are not employees; applies retroactively.
Citation:	184 Cal.App.3d 997, 51 CCC 408
WCC Citation:	WCC 24351986 CA

Case Name:	Gradle vs. Doppelmayer USA		02/27/2004
Summary:	RONALD MICHAEL GRADLE et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. DOPPELMAYR USA, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. A mechanic asked Gradle if he wanted the lift stopped and Gradle said no. Gradle climbed into the operator shack at the terminal. Gradle yelled to the mechanic, who was 20 feet away, to take the lift to start speed and then stop it. Gradle squatted on top of the tub wall waiting for the lift to stop and slipped. Gradle testified the maintenance mechanic smelled "boozy" and appeared a little hung over the morning of the accident.
Note:	Cal-OSHA standards admissible to prove negligence per se against third party.
Citation:	116 Cal.App.4th 276
WCC Citation:	WCC 29722004 CA

Case Name:	Graham vs. WCAB		05/12/1989
Summary:	In July 1983, Graham filed an application with the Board for the adjudication of his claim for medical treatment and permanent disability benefits. Graham also filed a civil action against Dr. Peter Macs (later amended to the Estate of Macs) seeking damages for medical malpractice in Dr. Macs's treatment of Graham for the injuries he sustained in the bus accident. The Transit District then petitioned for credit, in the amount of the settlement, against the Transit District's liability for future workers' compensation payments to Graham. Graham filed a petition for reconsideration with the Board on the ground that the malpractice settlement was not subject to credit. 5 [2b] Graham counters that the conditions for invoking the statute were met in this case where counsel acknowledged in settlement discussions that Graham was entitled to workers' compensation benefits and did not include such benefits in computing the settlement.
Note:	Employer entitled to credit if the medical malpractice settlement does not consider workers' compensation benefits in arriving at the result.
Citation:	210 CA3d 499
WCC Citation:	WCC 30191989 CA

Case Name:	Granado vs. WCAB		10/04/1968
Summary:	HENRY GRANADO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, HASLETT WAREHOUSE et al. , Respondents. The board's position is that this rule should be applied to temporary disability cases. Thus we were not directly confronted with the question whether temporary disability may be apportioned as between industrial and nonindustrial injuries. There is a substantial difference between the rules governing apportionment between industrial injuries and those governing apportionment between industrial and nonindustrial injuries. We thus need not consider reports other than Dr. McIvor's, including one that the entire disability was due to the preexisting nonindustrial condition.
Note:	Temporary disability is not apportionable.
Citation:	69 Cal.2d 399
WCC Citation:	WCC 29581968 CA

Case Name:	Graphic Arts Mutual Ins. Co. v. Time Travel Internat., Inc.		02/02/2005
Summary:	GRAPHIC ARTS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TIME TRAVEL INTERNATIONAL, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. Because we find that plaintiff and appellant Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance Company may proceed in superior court, we reverse the judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend. From September 15, 1993 through September 15, 1994, appellant insured defendant and respondent Time Travel International, Inc. , for workers' compensation benefits. DISCUSSION Appellant contends the trial court has jurisdiction over its complaint for indemnity against respondent pursuant to section 5500. 5, subdivision (a). Lungren v. Superior Court (1996) 14 Cal. 4th 294, 300; Moore v. Regents of University of California (1990) 51 Cal. 3d 120, 125. )
Note:	WCAB does not have exclusive jurisdiction in a carrier's action against an uninsured employer in a CT reimbursement claim.
Citation:	126 Cal. App. 4th 405
WCC Citation:	WCC 30762005 CA

Case Name:	Gravelin v. Satterfield		11/15/2011
Summary:	GARY GRAVELIN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PAUL SATTERFIELD et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiff Gary Gravelin, a hired worker, was injured while installing a satellite dish on the roof of a residence. Dish Network outsourced the job to Linkus Enterprises, Inc. , which sent plaintiff Gary Gravelin to perform the installation job. Plaintiff Gravelin testified that the roof extension looked like it was constructed of roofing plywood. Raymond Coolidge did not talk with plaintiff Gravelin when Gravelin arrived to install the satellite dish.
Note:	A trio of homeowners are not liable for a satellite dish installation worker's slip and fall from their roof because they did not owe him a duty.
Citation:	A131333
WCC Citation:	WCC 38262011 CA

Case Name:	Green v. State of California		08/23/2007
Summary:	Ct. No. RCV060816 DWIGHT D. GREEN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant and Appellant. Plaintiff began working for the State of California in 1974. In 1987, plaintiff worked as a stationary engineer for the Department of Corrections at the California Institute for Men in Chino (the Institute). In this case, for example, if because of his hepatitis C plaintiff Dwight Green was unable to perform the essential duties of a stationary engineer at a state prison, defendant State of California did not violate FEHA by terminating him because of his disability. (Sara M. v. Superior Court (2005) 36 Cal. 4th 998, 1012-1014; Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Bd.
Note:	The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that plaintiffs prove they are 'qualified individuals' under the statute, i.e., that they have the ability to perform a job's essential duties before they can prevail in a lawsuit for discrimination...the FEHA requires employees to prove that they are qualified individuals under the statute just as the federal ADA requires.
Citation:	42 Cal. 4th 254
WCC Citation:	WCC 32422007 CA

Case Name:	Green v. WCAB (City of Compton)		03/30/2005
Summary:	City answered that any delay was part of continuous conduct, and, thus, the WCAB correctly awarded a single increase of compensation. Green Petitions for Reconsideration Green petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration. In addition, none of the reporting physicians prior to the agreed medical examiners indicated Green required vocational rehabilitation. On November 3, 2003, the WCAB adopted the WCJ's report and decision, and denied Green reconsideration. Weiss and Fauget, and then again by the Stipulation, the WCAB should have awarded multiple increases in compensation.
Note:	LC 5814 as amended by SB 899 applies retroactively to cases still open as of effective date.
Citation:	127 Cal.App.4th 1426
WCC Citation:	WCC 30902005 CA

Case Name:	Greene v. Countrywide Home Loans		10/29/2007
Summary:	Ct. No. 042760) (Ventura County) Plaintiff, Mercedes Greene, appeals a summary judgment in favor of defendants, Frank Duda, Anne Babb and Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (Countrywide), her former employer, in her wrongful termination, sexual harassment, retaliatory discharge and disability discrimination action. Duda reported receiving this package to Countrywide and made a complaint against Greene because "two of the emails contained death threats. "Countrywide concluded that Greene violated its workplace violence policy and a rule prohibiting employees from using its email system to send "threatening messages. "Greene claimed that in 2002 there were a series of incidents showing a pattern of harassment against her by Duda and Countrywide. She did not consider Greene's gender or any complaint Greene had made against Countrywide in deciding to terminate her employment.
Note:	[Unpublished] The plaintiff did not meet her burden to overcome the defendant-employer's evidence which shows it did not engage in harassment or discrimination and it had legitimate reasons for terminating the plaintiff-employee.
Citation:	B192329
WCC Citation:	WCC 32732007 CA

Case Name:	Greener v. WCAB		12/27/1993
Summary:	GLENN GREENER et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, Defendant and Respondent. Noting that the dismissal order was not appealable since it was not signed by the court (Code Civ. The workers' compensation law nowhere states that the Board is not subject to suit in the superior court. (See generally, Abelleira v. District Court of Appeal (1941) 17 Cal. 2d 280 [109 P. 2d 942, 132 A. L. R. 715]; 2 Witkin, Cal. It appears to so concede elsewhere where it argues that the award of fees for legal services in workers' compensation proceedings is a subject 'within the exclusive subject matter jurisdiction of the WCAB. '
Note:	5955 relates to subject matter jurisdiction, not personal jurisdiction; No law says Board is not subject to suit in superior court.
Citation:	6 Cal.4th 1028, 58 CCC 793
WCC Citation:	WCC 27441993 CA

Case Name:	Greener v. WCAB		12/27/1993
Summary:	GLENN GREENER et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, Defendant and Respondent. Noting that the dismissal order was not appealable since it was not signed by the court (Code Civ. The workers' compensation law nowhere states that the Board is not subject to suit in the superior court. (See generally, Abelleira v. District Court of Appeal (1941) 17 Cal. 2d 280 [109 P. 2d 942, 132 A. L. R. 715]; 2 Witkin, Cal. It appears to so concede elsewhere where it argues that the award of fees for legal services in workers' compensation proceedings is a subject 'within the exclusive subject matter jurisdiction of the WCAB. '
Note:	Plaintiffs' remedies are limited to petition for review if Board fails to award fees.
Citation:	6 Cal.4th 1028, 58 CCC 793
WCC Citation:	WCC 26041993 CA

Case Name:	Greer v. Safeway, Inc.		06/15/2010
Summary:	In 2002, while still employed with Safeway, Greer made a claim to the Workers Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) for benefits. In June 2006, Greer filed a complaint with the WCAB against Safeway for improperly distributing Greer's medical information. In September 2007, Greer filed a complaint against Safeway and Richard Lyding, an attorney for Safeway, in Napa County Superior Court. On August 10, 2009, Greer filed a notice of appeal from the court's order for attorney fees dated August 3, 2009 (case No. It bears repeating that the trial court proceedings were stayed because Greer had already filed suit in federal court.
Note:	[Unpublished] Appeals dismissed for failure to file opening briefs in conformance with California Rules of Court, and appellant declared a vexatious litigant.
Citation:	A125741
WCC Citation:	WCC 36382010 CA

Case Name:	Gregory v. Cott		01/28/2013
Summary:	GREGORY v. COTT CAROLYN GREGORY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LORRAINE COTT et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Lorraine injured the caregiver, plaintiff Carolyn Gregory, who thereupon sued Lorraine for battery and Lorraine and Bernard for negligence and premises liability. In this case, Mrs. Cott was not an Alzheimer's patient; vis-à-vis plaintiff, she was not a patient at all. Mrs. Cott was not placed in plaintiff's care, first and foremost because, having no medical or nursing license or certification, plaintiff was completely unqualified to provide medical care to Mrs. Cott. Given that Mrs. Cott was unable to care for herself, and knowing that she was at times aggressive and combative, Mr. Cott chose, no doubt at great personal sacrifice, to care for her at home.
Note:	The assumption of risk doctrine barred a home care worker from suing a violent patient for negligence.
Citation:	B237645
WCC Citation:	WCC 39762013 CA

Case Name:	Greitz v. Sivachenko		07/29/1957
Summary:	ALEXANDER L. GREITZ, Respondent, v. DIMITRI Y. SIVACHENKO et al. , Appellants. COUNSEL Dimitri Y. Sivachenko, in pro. Defendants appeal from a judgment ordering partition of real property by sale and division of the proceeds. By award filed August 5, 1954, the Industrial Accident Commission ordered appellant Dimitri Sivachenko to make payments to respondent on account of injuries sustained in the course of the latter's employment on September 29, 1953. After expiration of the period for redemption, the sheriff deeded this interest to respondent, who commenced this action for partition.
Note:	On filing copy of award, clerk must immediately enter judgment, no notice required; clerk part of commission, not superior court which can't stay or modify award.
Citation:	152 Cal.App.2d 849, 22 CCC 176
WCC Citation:	WCC 26081957 CA

Case Name:	Greyhound Lines v. WCAB		05/14/1984
Summary:	Greyhound Lines, Inc. , Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, (Floyd D. Plunkett, injured party), Respondents. 6), Greyhound filed a petition, with supporting declaration, 'for automatic reassignment of regular hearing to another workers' compensation judge. 'The hearing on this issue was also assigned to Judge Williams and Greyhound did not in this instance seek a reassignment under rule 10453. Cases 488), Greyhound had a basis upon which to challenge that judge 'for cause'; and that Greyhound therefore had no right to an 'automatic' reassignment pursuant to rule 10453. Second, since Greyhound possessed a basis upon which to seek reassignment 'for cause,' a petition for reassignment on that ground provided the exclusive remedy.
Note:	Challenge to WCJ for cause need not be conditioned on the absence of a specific ground.
Citation:	49 CCC 354
WCC Citation:	WCC 27691984 CA

Case Name:	Greyhound Lines v. WCAB		05/14/1984
Summary:	Greyhound Lines, Inc. , Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, (Floyd D. Plunkett, injured party), Respondents. 6), Greyhound filed a petition, with supporting declaration, 'for automatic reassignment of regular hearing to another workers' compensation judge. 'The hearing on this issue was also assigned to Judge Williams and Greyhound did not in this instance seek a reassignment under rule 10453. Cases 488), Greyhound had a basis upon which to challenge that judge 'for cause'; and that Greyhound therefore had no right to an 'automatic' reassignment pursuant to rule 10453. Second, since Greyhound possessed a basis upon which to seek reassignment 'for cause,' a petition for reassignment on that ground provided the exclusive remedy.
Note:	Continuation of an adjourned hearing shall be decided by original referee.
Citation:	49 CCC 354
WCC Citation:	WCC 25541984 CA

Case Name:	Grimaldo v. WCAB		03/19/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR B208959 (WCAB No. LBO 0370243) JOEL GRIMALDO, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD et al. , Respondents. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Joel Grimaldo worked for four years as an event aide at Abbey, a party rental service. On that day, Grimaldo slipped at work and noticed an open wound on his left great toe. Raymond Bautista, D. P. M. , a treating physician, declared Grimaldo permanent and stationary in a report of February 22, 2006. However, he reported that Grimaldo needed strict management of his diabetes so he could undergo surgery for an infected bone in his left foot.
Note:	[Unpublished] The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board relied upon insufficient evidence when it ruled that a claimant's diabetes was not not lit up or aggravated by an industrial injury to the foot.
Citation:	B208959
WCC Citation:	WCC 35052009 CA

Case Name:	Grom vs. Shasta Wood Products		12/08/2004
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. RDG 0091839 KENNETH GROM, Applicant, vs. SHASTA WOOD PRODUCTS; and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendants. STATEMENT OF FACTS Applicant, Kenneth Grom, sustained an injury to his back on July 27, 1999 arising out of and in the course of his employment by Shasta Wood Products. We require evidence-based studies that are of sufficient quality before we can accept hypogonadism as an industrial injury. Defendant contends that any recommended treatment must both cure and relieve applicant from the effects of his industrial injury. Thus, the phrase "cure or relieve" is identical to the phrase "cure and relieve," such that their use is interchangeable.
Note:	'Cure and relieve' means 'cure or relieve.'
Citation:	69 CCC (2004); Panel
WCC Citation:	WCC 30672004 CA

Case Name:	Grossmont Hospital v. WCAB (Kyllonen)		12/11/1977
Summary:	GROSSMONT HOSPITAL, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and MAY R. KYLLONEN, Respondents. [59 Cal. App. 4th 1352] Background On April 16, 1995, respondent May R. Kyllonen (Kyllonen), a full-time employee for petitioner Grossmont Hospital (Grossmont), sustained an admitted injury in the course of her employment. The first three methods were based on the actual earnings of the employee or those of employees in the same class. First, the section relied upon by Grossmont is taken out of context. Moreover, if an overall purpose of the legislation was to reduce litigation, Grossmont provides no support for its contention Thrifty Drug led to increased litigation.
Note:	Anticipated wage increase after injury to be considered in TD rate.
Citation:	59 C.A.4th 1348
WCC Citation:	WCC 29161977 CA