Case Name:	In the Matter of John H. Hoffman, Jr.		05/17/2006
Summary:	On October 26, 2005, we granted reconsideration in order to further study this matter. This appearance occurred after a WCJ's August 20, 2004 order approving a compromise and release resolved the applicant's underlying claim in the matter. This appearance occurred after a WCJ's February 21, 2003 order approving a compromise and release that had settled the applicant's claim in the matter. Although the notice of representation purported to bear Hoffman's signature, he asserted at trial that the signature was not his. As a general rule, a person who is not licensed to practice law is allowed to practice before the WCAB.
Note:	Rule 10779 and the State Bar Act preclude any non-reinstated former attorney who has been disbarred or suspended by the Supreme Court from appearing as a representative of any party before the WCAB.
Citation:	70 CCC 609
WCC Citation:	WCC 31602006 CA

Case Name:	Industrial Indemnity Co. v. WCAB		12/29/1997
Summary:	INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, Respondents. 1 The workers' compensation referee (WCR) assessed an award against Industrial Indemnity Company (Industrial), State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), and CIGA proportionate to periods of coverage by Industrial, SCIF, and insolvent Pacific States Casualty Company (Pacific). Seeking reconsideration by the Board, CIGA asserted a joint and several award should be issued against Industrial and SCIF. Upon reconsideration, the Board rescinded the WCR's award and substituted a joint and several award against Industrial and SCIF. Any liability that Industrial Indemnity and State Compensation Insurance Fund insure is for their particular share of the cumulative trauma under their policies of insurance. '
Note:	CIGA not liable for workers' comp. when two other insurers were also liable for benefits.
Citation:	60 Cal.App.4th 548, 62 CCC 1661
WCC Citation:	WCC 25411997 CA

Case Name:	Industrial Indemnity Co. v. WCAB		03/13/1985
Summary:	On June 4, 1981, Elvis Elizondo (applicant) sustained injury in the course of his employment as a journeyman taper by Raymond Interior Systems, insured by Industrial Indemnity Company (Industrial). Industrial failed to reply to applicant's request until March 1982, when its counsel arranged for a job analysis. Industrial appealed the consultant's order to the workers' compensation judge (WCJ), who, after a hearing, issued an order affirming and adopting the consultant's order. Fund, supra, 9 Cal. Workers'Comp. Rptr. 212, Aguja v. Industrial Indemnity Co. (1982) 79 SF 280-205, 10 Cal. Workers'Comp. Rptr. 205, and Mosqueda v. Lear Siegler, Inc. (1983) 81 LA 463-871, 11 Cal. Workers'Comp. Rptr. 252. Section 139. 5 provides in part as follows: "(a) The administrative director shall establish within the Division of Industrial Accidents a rehabilitation unit, which .
Note:	The Board's statutory interpretation allowing benefits during the qualified injured worker (QIW) evaluation period, provided the employee in good faith presents prima facie evidence justifying a request for rehabilitation, clearly forecloses false claims. Such interpretation is consistent with, and not in conflict with, the statute, and is reasonably necessary to effect the statutory purposes.
Citation:	B003862
WCC Citation:	WCC 34351985 CA

Case Name:	Infinet Marketing Services, Inc. v. American Motorist Insurance Company		04/06/2007
Summary:	Ct. No. 04CC07426) OPINION INFINET MARKETING SERVICES, INC. , Cross-complainant and Appellant, v. AMERICAN MOTORIST INSURANCE COMPANY, Cross-defendant and Respondent. When a defense was refused, the insurance broker cross-complained against the insurance company claiming insurance bad faith. InfiNet Insurance and Financial Network (InfiNet), is a Texas corporation in the business of providing marketing services to employee leasing companies. When a defense was refused, the marketing company cross-complained against the insurance company claiming insurance bad faith. (Infinet Marketing Services v. American Motorist Insurance Company (Mar.
Note:	The insurance broker is not a third party beneficiary of the insurance contract.
Citation:	150 Cal. App. 4th 168
WCC Citation:	WCC 32182007 CA

Case Name:	Infospan, Inc. v. Ensign Communique (Pvt.) Ltd.		10/23/2017
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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN .             INFOSPAN, INC. et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             ENSIGN COMMUNIQUE (PVT. ).             B265490 .             (Los Angeles County Super. .             Lindborg & Mazor, Peter F. Lindborg, Irina J. Mazor; Boies Schiller & Flexner and William A. Isaacson for Plaintiffs and Appellants. .             Plaintiffs Infospan, Inc. and Infospan (Pvt. )* .           We concur: .           PERLUSS, P. J.
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that a workers’ compensation claims collection service could not attempt to relitigate its claims against a rival for allegedly interfering with its client relationships.
Citation:	B265490
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC499795

Case Name:	Iniguez v. Blue Rose Concrete Contractors, Inc.		07/08/2016
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD  STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             ENRIQUE INIGUEZ, Applicant, .             v. .             BLUE ROSE CONCRETE CONTRACTORS, INC. ; ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, Defendants. .             Case No. ADJ7672487 (Pomona District Office) .             OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION .             The Appeals Board previously granted reconsideration to further study the factual and legal issues. .           WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD .           JOSE H. RAZO .           I CONCUR, .           DEIDRA E. LOWE .           I DISSENT. .           MARGUERITE SWEENEY .           DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA .           JUL 0 8 Z016 DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER SWEENEY  .           I dissent. .           WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD .           MARGUERITE SWEENEY, Commissioner .           DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA .           JUL 0 8 2016 Section 5313 is within Chapter I, "Jurisdiction," of Part 4, Division 4 of the Labor Code.
Note:
Citation:	ADJ7672487
WCC Citation:	ADJ7672487

Case Name:	Iniguez v. WCAB (Blue Rose Concrete Contractors, Inc.)		04/12/2017
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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO .             ENRIQUE INIGUEZ, Petitioner, .             v. .             WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, BLUE ROSE CONCRETE CONTRACTORS, INC. et al. , Respondents. .             No. B276997 .             (W. C. A. B. No. ADJ7672487) .             PROCEEDINGS to review a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. .             Richard L. Newman, Anne Schmitz, and Peter Ray for Respondent Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. .             Tobin • Lucks and Christopher Arthur Ball for Respondents Blue Rose Concrete Contractors, Inc. and Zurich North America-Los Angeles. .           __________________________, Acting P. J. ASHMANN-GERST .           We concur: .           _____________________________, J. CHAVEZ .           ____________________________, J. HOFFSTADT Dr. Fisher diagnosed a cervical strain with electrodiagnostic evidence of a right C6-7 radiculopathy and lumbosacral strain with spinal stenosis of a bilateral L5-S1 radiculopathy.
Note:
Citation:	B276997
WCC Citation:	W.C.A.B. No. ADJ7672487

Case Name:	Insur. Co. of N. America v. T.L.C. Lines		10/16/1996
Summary:	INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. T. L. C. LINES, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Respondents. On December 10, 1991, appellant Insurance Company of North America (hereinafter INA) filed the instant action in the Kern County Municipal Court against respondents T. L. C. Lines, Inc. , and Lawrence Edward Barrows (hereinafter collectively TLC). Plaintiff, Insurance Company of North America (hereinafter 'INA') was the Worker's Compensation insurance carrier for Lonnie Ray Guidry's employer at the time of the accident on December 10, 1990. This letter was the first notification to anyone on behalf of the defendants of the Worker's Compensation claim by Lonnie Ray Guidry. The case was briefed by the parties, argued before Judge Arthur E. Wallace on September 29, 1994, and submitted.
Note:	Where the tortfeasor settles with an insured in good faith, the insurer's right to recovery from the tortfeasor is barred but the insurer may be able to recover from its insured.
Citation:	50 Cal.App.4th 90, 61 CCC 1166
WCC Citation:	WCC 23901996 CA

Case Name:	Integrated Healthcare Holdings inc. v. Weiss (G041905)		09/13/2010
Summary:	INTEGRATED HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, INC. , Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent, v. ANDREW L. WEISS, Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant. The settlement resolved an employment dispute between Andrew L. Weiss (Weiss), a labor and employment attorney, and Integrated Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (IHHI), a start-up company he helped launch. The complaint alleged Weiss was bound by paragraph 16 of the JAMS settlement to dismiss with prejudice the 132a petition. IHHI also filed a motion for preliminary injunction in the superior court, seeking to enjoin Weiss from further prosecuting his 132a petition. Weiss states in a footnote that this motion was denied, but the record is silent as to its fate.
Note:	An attorney who had settled a lawsuit against his former employer breached the parties' settlement agreement by continuing to pursue a Labor Code 132a claim against the employer at the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, the 4th District Court of Appeal concluded.
Citation:	G041905
WCC Citation:	WCC 36662010 CA

Case Name:	Integrated Healthcare Holdings inc. v. Weiss (G042016)		09/13/2010
Summary:	INTEGRATED HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, INC. , Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant, v. ANDREW L. WEISS, Defendant, Cross-complainant and Respondent. The settlement resolved an employment dispute between Andrew L. Weiss, (Weiss) a labor and employment attorney, and Integrated Healthcare Holdings, Inc. , (IHHI) a start-up company he helped launch. About eight months later, on February 10, 2006, Weiss filed two workers' compensation claims for personal injuries incurred while working for IHHI. On October 27, Weiss filed a "Declaration of Readiness" to set the 132a petition for trial. Accordingly, IHHI shall forthwith distribute said shares to WEISS, and WEISS shall have judgment against IHHI in connection with his cross-complaint to this effect. "
Note:	An attorney who had settled a lawsuit against his former employer breached the parties' settlement agreement by continuing to pursue a Labor Code 132a claim against the employer at the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, the 4th District Court of Appeal concluded.
Citation:	G042016
WCC Citation:	WCC 36652010 CA

Case Name:	Integrated Investigations Inc. v. O'Donnell		10/18/2011
Summary:	INTEGRATED INVESTIGATIONS, INC. v. O'DONNELL INTEGRATED INVESTIGATIONS, INC. , et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. CHRISTY L. O'DONNELL, Defendant and Appellant. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Integrated Investigations, Inc. (Integrated), Paul F. Thornton, and Ian Farrell filed a lawsuit against the County of Los Angeles (the County) and Christy L. O'Donnell after Integrated, a private investigation company, learned that the County had sent emails and other communications to various entities, stating that Integrated was not to be hired to conduct investigations for the County and related entities. Integrated provided its report on the surveillance of Villegas on April 26, 2009; the report did not address the incident involving the car chase. It alleges that, sometime after the meeting with O'Donnell, Integrated received several calls from various claims adjustors, asking if Integrated was involved in an embezzlement situation in another county, because the County had sent out emails and other communications stating that Integrated was not to be used for any investigations on behalf of the County or other entities. The declaration of Paul Thornton, who is the Vice-President of Integrated, stated that he arranged for the meeting between his investigators and O'Donnell.
Note:	A California appellate court on Tuesday threw out a private investigation firm's lawsuit against a defense attorney who had advised agencies affiliated with Los Angeles County to avoid using the firm because it had failed to report to the county that one of its investigators had been involved in a high-speed chase with a workers' compensation applicant.
Citation:	B231035
WCC Citation:	WCC 38132011 CA

Case Name:	Interstate Fire and Casualty Ins. Co. v Cleveland Wrecking Co.		02/22/2010
Summary:	Ct. No. 475134) Interstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Company (Interstate) appeals from a judgment entered after the court sustained, without leave to amend, a demurrer to Interstate's amended complaint against Cleveland Wrecking Company (Cleveland). Cleveland Wrecking Company (Cleveland) was a subcontractor responsible for certain demolition work. The good faith settlement does not bar Interstate from pursuing its cause of action for express contractual indemnification against Cleveland. Cleveland contends Webcor did not actually suffer any loss, because Interstate paid the costs of defending against and settling Frisby's claims. Cleveland urges that Webcor does not have an existing cause of action against Cleveland because Webcor has already been fully compensated by Interstate.
Note:	It is prudent to permit subrogation, so that a party with an alleged contractual indemnification obligation will be encouraged to step up in the underlying case and either fulfill the obligation (and implicitly help settle the case) or resolve any dispute over the application of the indemnification obligation.
Citation:	A124920
WCC Citation:	WCC 36002010 CA

Case Name:	Irvine Eurocars v. WCAB (Shelly)		02/11/2011
Summary:	Irvine and Redwood contend that the WCJ should have found from the evidence that applicant was employed by Shelly on the date of injury. Irvine denied that applicant was its employee, claiming instead that she was placed on the Irvine payroll only so that she could receive its group health insurance and that she actually was Shelly's employee and never performed any employment duties for Irvine. The WCJ's finding that applicant was employed by Irvine on the date of injury is supported by an earlier Appeals Board panel decision involving similar facts. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the petition of Irvine Eurocars, doing business as Irvine BMW, and of its workers' reconsideration of the December 1, 2010 Findings and Order of the workers' compensation compensation insurer, Redwood Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, for administrative law judge is DENIED. The record shows that applicant applied for employment as a home assistant/nanny for Shelly and never worked at the Irvine automobile dealership.
Note:	The state Supreme Court will not review a split panel decision featuring a controversial dispute about whether an auto dealership was a nanny's employer.
Citation:	ADJ4715696
WCC Citation:	WCC 37872011 CA

Case Name:	Islas vs. D & G Manufacturing Co., Inc.		07/09/2004
Summary:	KEYN HERNANDEZ ISLAS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. D & G MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. RELEVANT FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On October 30, 2001, Islas filed a complaint for personal injury against National Sheet Metal Machines, Inc. (National) and respondent D & G Manufacturing Company, Inc. (D & G). The complaint alleges that on October 31, 2000, Islas was employed by D & G, and was operating a power press made by National. D & G submitted deposition testimony from John Gleason, a supervisor for D & G, who denied that the blades were properly classified as a "die. "The trial court nonetheless directed D & G to prepare a written order containing its findings and rulings.
Note:	Definition of 'power press' is one of fact for trier of fact.
Citation:	120 Cal.App.4th 571
WCC Citation:	WCC 29972004 CA

Case Name:	Ito v. WCAB (Fry's Food Stores)		10/29/1993
Summary:	Lori Ito, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California, Fry's Food Stores, et al. , Respondents. COUNSEL: For petitioner--Frank Ury For respondent employer--Nathan Gilbert OPINION BY: Newsom, Acting P. J. OPINION: Lori Ito (applicant) worked as a food clerk for Fry's Food Stores (employer). She loaded it with anything from toilet paper to 50-pound bags of dog food. The other 25 percent of the time she did checking and customer service at the front of the store. The WCJ found that the second trial was not collaterally estopped by the first because the issues were not identical.
Note:	When doubt exists as to whether injuries are cumulative or separate, file separate applications for each incident.
Citation:	58 CCC 744
WCC Citation:	WCC 27581993 CA

Case Name:	Iverson v. California Village Homeowners Assoc.		03/23/2011
Summary:	IVERSEN v. CALIFORNIA VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION KURT IVERSEN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION Defendant and respondent California Village Homeowner's Association (California Village) hired plaintiff and appellant Kurt Iversen (Iversen), an independent contractor, to service air conditioner units on the roofs of several of the buildings at its Tarzana, California condominium complex. California Village moved for summary judgment, inter alia, on the ground that Iversen could not rely on Cal-OSHA to support a negligence action because he was an independent contractor and not California Village's employee. In addition, California Village also contended that Iversen could not show that its failure to install safety equipment caused him to fall. Finally, California Village argued that Iversen voluntarily used the ladder knowing of its condition, thereby assuming any risk associated with the ladder.
Note:	An independent contractor could not rely on Cal-OSHA regulations to establish negligence per se in a premises liability suit, the California 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	B220863
WCC Citation:	WCC 37352011 CA

Case Name:	J.C. Penney v. WCAB		07/07/2009
Summary:	Petitioners J. C. Penney Company and its insurer American Home Assurance Company, adjusted by AIG Claim Services, (collectively J. C. Penney) contend that respondent the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) erred in limiting a credit for overpayment of temporary disability indemnity. The WCAB limited the requested credit on the ground that J. C. Penney failed to object, under Labor Code section 4062,*fn1 to the ongoing determinations of Edwards's treating physicians that he remained temporarily totally disabled. J. C. Penney argues that the WCAB erred because the treating physicians' determinations were based on an incorrect legal theory and do not afford substantial evidence of ongoing temporary disability. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On July 23, 2003, Edwards was on a ladder painting a J. C. Penney store in Sacramento. However, J. C. Penney offered no claim of good cause for failure to object in the WCAB proceedings. (1980) 111 Cal. App. 3d 827 (Maples). J. C. Penney replies that the factual record in this case does not support an estoppel. J. C. Penney has the more persuasive position.
Note:	It is contrary to the spirit of section 4062 to permit a retrospective determination of a permanent and stationary date when to do so would be to allow a belated objection to a medical determination by the treating physician.
Citation:	C059760
WCC Citation:	WCC 35402009 CA

Case Name:	J.T. Thorp, Inc. v. WCAB		03/20/1984
Summary:	[153 Cal. App. 3d 331] Needless to say, we think the problem at hand is correctly solved according to presumptions mandated by law. Lien claimant Permanente Medical Group presented an itemization of expenses for X-rays and associated services in the amount of $322. 40. A compensable injury may render the employer liable for, among other things, the cost of medical treatment ( § 4600;Granado v. Workmen's Comp. [1] Medical treatment and disability indemnity are separate and distinct elements of compensation which fulfill different, though complementary, legislative goals. Temporary disability indemnity is intended primarily to substitute for the worker's lost wages, in order to maintain a steady stream of income.
Note:	An employee suffering from asbestosis may obtain reimbursement for predisability medical expenses and does not prohibit the board from awarding additional compensation for medical expenses or for disability manifesting itself more than five years after initial diagnosis or treatment.
Citation:	153 Cal.App.3d 327, 49 CCC 224
WCC Citation:	WCC 26631984 CA

Case Name:	Jablonski v. Royal Globe Ins. Co.		09/02/1988
Summary:	EMANUEL JABLONSKI et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. ROYAL GLOBE INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents [Opinion certified for partial publication. ]Plaintiffs Emanuel and Dagmar Jablonski filed suit against defendants Royal Globe Insurance Company, Jones Brand & Hullen Insurance Services, Inc. and Michael Petkus alleging a virtual smorgasbord of causes of action. He further argued that his causes of action against Royal Globe and its agents were not barred under the act because that insurer forfeited its protection when it committed intentional torts against him. Co. (1985) 175 Cal. App. 3d 146, 148 [220 Cal. Rptr. 549]; Soto v. Royal Globe Ins. Plaintiff's complaint alleged that Royal Globe denied coverage under the workers' compensation policy and committed other unfair practices.
Note:	No immunity for TPA who committed intentional tort in investigating claim.
Citation:	204 Cal.App.3d 379, 53 CCC 402
WCC Citation:	WCC 24261988 CA

Case Name:	Jackson v. Home Depot		06/13/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE DAVID JACKSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THE HOME DEPOT U. S. A. , INC. , Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION A pipe fell from overhead shelving and struck plaintiff and appellant David Jackson (plaintiff), an employee of Washington Inventory (Washington), while he was performing inventory services for defendant and respondent The Home Depot U. S. A. , Inc. (Home Depot). The trial court agreed with Home Depot and issued an order granting a new trial. *fn3 A Home Depot employee in an orange vest approached plaintiff and asked him what he needed. Because plaintiff had his back to the Home Depot employee on the ladder, plaintiff did not see what struck him.
Note:	[Unpublished] Plaintiff knew or should have known better than to linger, even for a short period of time, near a ladder on which an employee is engaging in an obviously dangerous activity.
Citation:	B196344
WCC Citation:	WCC 33842008 CA

Case Name:	Jackson v. Raley's		11/29/2012
Summary:	When I attempted to discuss reasonable accommodations, such as modified or alternative jobs that [Jackson] might be able to perform with his medical restrictions, [Jackson] refused to continue the conversation. However, believing that Jackson was no longer employed by Raley's, Archie did not call Jackson during his bid time. Raley's also pointed out that Gabbert immediately sent Jackson a letter summarizing the phone call and encouraging Jackson to contact him to discuss possible accommodations, but Jackson neither responded to the letter nor contacted anyone at Raley's to discuss such accommodations. Gabbert sent [Jackson] a letter confirming their call and requesting [Jackson] contact him to discuss accommodations. Despite Gabbert's letter informing Jackson to contact him if he changed his mind and wanted to discuss qualifications or alternate positions at Raley's, Jackson refused to engage.
Note:	The 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled that a former supermarket worker could not hold his employer liable for its alleged failure to engage in a good faith interactive process to find accommodation for his disability when the worker himself failed to engage in the interactive process at all.
Citation:	C067248
WCC Citation:	WCC 39612012 CA

Case Name:	Jackson v. WCAB		10/27/2005
Summary:	on rehearing) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) CYNTHIA JACKSON et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION et al. , Respondents. II Procedure Cynthia Jackson, as the guardian ad litem for Barryn Davis, Jr. , filed an application for adjudication of claim asserting that Davis, Sr. 's heart attack arose out of and in the course of his employment. In those proceedings, Jackson invoked the presumption contained in Labor Code section 3212. 2, which provides in relevant part: "In the case of officers and employees in the Department of Corrections having custodial duties, . The WCAB concluded that the medical evidence that the cause of death was "the non-industrial viral infection that led to the development of the myocarditis" constituted sufficient evidence "to rebut the presumption of industrial causation. "Jackson filed a petition for a writ and we issued a writ of review.
Note:	Employer must do more to rebut the presumption of compensability than present evidence that nothing in the employee's job caused his heart attack.
Citation:	133 Cal. App. 4th 965; 35 Cal. Rptr. 3d 256
WCC Citation:	WCC 31282005 CA

Case Name:	James W. Cristler et al. v. Express Messenger Systems		01/23/2009
Summary:	Ct. No. GIC803519) Â		  BARRY NEWMANN,               Plaintiff,               v.   EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS, INC. , et al. ,               Defendants.               James W. Cristler, John Purves, James G. Harrod, Sydney Moroff and Mark Lambert, individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons (collectively Cristler), sued a parcel delivery company, Express Messenger Systems, Inc. , doing business as California Overnight (Express Messenger). The lawsuit contained a number of causes of actions, all based on a core contention that Express Messenger improperly classified its employees as independent contractors.             Drivers who elected to continue working with Express Messenger after the change entered into written independent contractor agreements with SCI to perform delivery services for Express Messenger.             In December 2004, Cristler filed a complaint against Express Messenger on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated employees/independent contractors of Express Messenger.
Note:	Drivers for a delivery service were independent contractors, even though the company had terminated its employees and contracted with them to perform the same duties.
Citation:	D050719
WCC Citation:	WCC 34822009 CA

Case Name:	Janet v. IAC		12/01/1965
Summary:	MORTON L. JANET, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION, BROWN DRILLING CO. , et al. , Respondents. On November 27, 1960, petitioner suffered an industrial injury to his stomach, back, legs and chest when a derrick board fell upon him. On December 19, 1961, petitioner applied for medical care and further total temporary disability. Applicant thereafter was examined by an orthopedist of his own selection whose report of June 7, 1962, suggested a 'high volume type of myelogram. 'On June 24, 1963, applicant again petitioned for a hearing for temporary compensation, medical treatment and reimbursement for self-procured medical treatment.
Note:	TTD awarded where worker refused surgery that wasn't an aid to cure.
Citation:	238 Cal.App.2d 491, 30 CCC 411
WCC Citation:	WCC 24841965 CA

Case Name:	Janya v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group Part 1/2		01/07/2020
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 FOUR .             JAMES JANYA et al. ,Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP,Defendant and Respondent. .             B290754 .             (Los Angeles CountySuper. .             The Rager Law Firm, Jeffrey Rager, James Y. Yoon; Gusdorff Law and Janet Gusdorfffor Plaintiffs and Appellants. .             Davis Wright Tremaine, John P. LeCrone and Rochelle L. Wilcoxfor Defendant and Respondent.   .             Plaintiffs James Janya and Michael Salloom appeal from a summary judgment on their retaliation, wrongful termination, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims related to the termination of their employment with defendant Southern California Permanente Medical Group (SCPMG). . Bailey’s Meetings With Janya and Salloom .           On September 15, 2015, Bailey met (separately) with Janya and Salloom to discuss the results of his investigation.
Note:	A California appellate court upheld the dismissal of two workers’ claims for retaliation, wrongful termination, defamation and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Citation:	No. B290754
WCC Citation:	No. B290754

Case Name:	Janya v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group Part 2/2		01/07/2020
Summary:	Thus, Janya, and not Alepian, was the person responsible for the serious violation of policy. .           As a preliminary matter, we fail to see how this evidence establishes the existence of the glitch Janya describes. Janya stated that the glitch happened sometimes when he logged out without first hitting the “file” button. .           Finally, SCPMG presented evidence that Baileyinvestigated the purported glitch by contacting an expert from HealthConnect. .         NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS .         WILLHITE, Acting P. J.
Note:	A California appellate court upheld the dismissal of two workers’ claims for retaliation, wrongful termination, defamation and the intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Citation:	No. B290754
WCC Citation:	No. B290754

Case Name:	Janzen v. WCAB		12/30/1997
Summary:	STEPHANIE JANZEN et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, CLAYTON CURTIS et al. , Respondents. [61 Cal. App. 4th 112] OPINION PUGLIA, P. J. - Petitioner, Stephanie Janzen, seeks review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) dismissing her application for death benefits. Petitioner's father, Stanley Janzen (the deceased), a California resident, was killed in an airplane crash while working in Wyoming as a pilot for a Wyoming employer. 1 Curtis made a 'special appearance' in the workers' compensation proceeding, objecting to subject matter [61 Cal. App. 4th 113] jurisdiction. The State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) was later added as a defendant and Marvin Janzen was dropped.
Note:	Employment contract was entered into in CA; thus Sec. 5305 confers subject matter jurisdiction over dispute
Citation:	61 Cal.App.4th 109, 63 CCC 1
WCC Citation:	WCC 24811997 CA

Case Name:	Jeewarat v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.		09/03/2009
Summary:	FACTS Marc Brandon worked for Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. (Warner) as Vice-President of Anti-Piracy Internet Operations. The accident occurred at approximately 4:35 p. m. One or both cars struck and injured pedestrians Chuenchomporn Jeewarat, Tipphawan Tantisriyanurak and Kanhathai Vutthicharoen. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On February 2, 2007, Jeewarat and Tantisriyanurak filed a personal injury action against Brandon and Southard. On July 5, 2007, Jeewarat and Tantisriyanurak filed an amendment to the complaint substituting Warner as a Doe defendant. Warner asserted that even if the special errand doctrine applied, any special errand ended when Brandon drove his regular commute route home.
Note:	An employee's attendance at an out-of-town business conference may be considered a special errand under the special errand doctrine and the errand is not concluded simply because the employee drives his regular commute route, but rather, the errand is concluded when the employee returns home or deviates from the errand for personal reasons.
Citation:	B212323
WCC Citation:	WCC 35592009 CA

Case Name:	Jefferson v. CA Dept. of Youth Authority		07/01/2002
Summary:	MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The California Department of Youth Authority (the Youth Authority) employed Mary Jefferson from September 1992 to February 1994 to work part-time as a teacher's assistant in the high school classroom of Larry Berg. Eventually, the Youth Authority reassigned Jefferson to a different classroom, but at about the same time, her doctor recommended she stop working due to work-related stress. On July 9, 1996, Jefferson settled her workers' compensation claim against the Youth Authority using the mandatory form adopted by the workers' compensation appeals board (WCAB) for compromise and release of claims. Jefferson filed this civil action on August 23, 1996, against the Youth Authority and Larry Berg.
Note:	C&R that releases all claims sufficient to defeat FEHA claim arising from same facts.
Citation:	28 Cal.4th 299; 67 CCC 727
WCC Citation:	WCC 28662002 CA

Case Name:	Jefferson v. CA Youth Authority		03/26/2001
Summary:	MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Introduction Plaintiff Mary J. Jefferson appeals judgment entered in favor of defendants California Department of Youth Authority (CYA) and Larry Berg (defendants) following the trial court's ruling granting defendants' motion for summary judgment. Jefferson v. California Dept. of Youth Authority (2001) , Cal. App. 4th [No. E026915. MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. MARY J. JEFFERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH AUTHORITY et al. , Defendants and Respondents.
Note:	A general release in a C&R is effective against ALL other claims.
Citation:	87 Cal.App.4th 1357, 66 CCC 343
WCC Citation:	WCC 4232001 CA