Case Name:	City of South Pasadena v. Public Employment Relations Board (Snider),		02/26/2021
Summary:
Note:	A California appellate court upheld an administrative determination that a municipal employer retaliated against a firefighter for engaging in protected union activities but that he had also misused his leave time.
Citation:	B304596
WCC Citation:	B304596

Case Name:	City of South San Francisco v. WCAB (City of Pacifica)		02/26/2018
Summary:	Filed 2/26/18 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE .             CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, .             v. .             WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and CITY OF PACIFICA, Respondents. .             A151857 .             (W. C. A. B. No. ADJ2151993) .             Richard Johnson worked successively as a firefighter for the City of South San Francisco (CSSF) and for the City of Pacifica (Pacifica). [¶] . [We] may not reweigh the evidence or decide disputed questions of fact,” ’ ” ’ ” unless we determine the WCAB’s factual findings to be “ ‘ “ ‘ “unreasonable, illogical, improbable or inequitable when viewed in light of the overall statutory scheme. ” ’ ” ’ ” (City of Long Beach v. Workers’ Comp. [¶] .
Note:
Citation:	A151857
WCC Citation:	W.C.A.B. No. ADJ2151993

Case Name:	City of Stockton v. WCAB (Jenneiahn)		01/27/2006
Summary:	FACTS Sean Jenneiahn is employed as a police officer by the City of Stockton (the City). However, in the basement of the police department, the City maintains a gymnasium and workout facility that is available for officers' use. The facility where the injury occurred is owned and operated by the Stockton Police Officers' Association (SPOA), not by the City. Because the pool was located beyond the area under its control, the employer could not prohibit the employee from swimming in the pool. (Taylor, supra, 199 Cal. App. 3d at p. 216; see also Fireman's Fund, supra, 39 Cal. 2d at p. 534; City of Los Angeles, supra, 91 Cal. App. 3d at p.
Note:	Police officer injured while playing in a pickup game of basketball at a private facility not entitled to workers' compensation benefits.
Citation:	135 Cal. App. 4th 1513
WCC Citation:	WCC 31372006 CA

Case Name:	City, etc. of San Francisco v. IAC		04/28/1953
Summary:	CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and CATHERINE MURDOCK, Respondents. He had planned to get another position when he had to retire from city service at 65. Just before this Murdock and one Delmonte had been sawing a log approximately ten inches in diameter with a two-man cross-cut saw. The foreman testified that the sawing of logs was heavy work and that the particular log was green. He testified further than normally it was the duty of a gardener to cut up trees, and that they had always done that.
Note:	No continuance granted to produce witness when no timely effort made nor a showing witness would be of value.
Citation:	117 Cal.App.2d 455, 18 CCC 103
WCC Citation:	WCC 27611953 CA

Case Name:	City, Etc. of San Francisco v. WCAB (Medrano)		12/28/1973
Summary:	An award in the sum of $1,000 was made by respondent board in favor of Mrs. Cyr for such expenses. The board should have properly awarded the burial expenses to the widow subject to a lien in favor of Mrs. Cyr. The provisions defining what the 'death allowance' consists of appear throughout part six of the charter (§ 8. 540-8. 557). We do not perceive any conflict between the San Francisco Charter and the Labor Code in view of our conclusion that petitioner is entitled to a credit only for benefits which it comparably provides. The order is annulled and the matter is remanded to respondent board for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Note:	Non-heir payment of burial costs only entitled to a lien against heir's death benefit.
Citation:	36 Cal.App.3d 412, 39 CCC 52
WCC Citation:	WCC 24721973 CA

Case Name:	City, Etc. of San Francisco v. WCAB (Page)		08/05/1970
Summary:	CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HUGH JOSEPH QUINN, Respondents. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JAMES B. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and WILLIAM G. PAUL, Respondents. Claimants, a fireman and two police officers, sustained industrial injuries arising out of and in the course of their employment for the City and County of San Francisco. The City and County of San Francisco will not assume liability for the payment of medical services or hospitalization for the above injury, unless such care has been authorized by the Retirement Systems office. '
Note:	Disability retirement allowances paid when comp. benefits are due are
Citation:	2 Cal.3d 1001, 35 CCC 390
WCC Citation:	WCC 24491970 CA

Case Name:	City, Etc. of San Francisco v. WCAB (Shaughnessy)		02/04/1969
Summary:	CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, ROBERT W. SWALL, a Minor, etc. , et al. , Respondents. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, MARGARET M. MOREY et al. , Respondents. Lyons v. Hoover, supra, 41 Cal. 2d 145, 148, concerned a charter provision of the City of Sacramento substantially comparable to that of San Francisco. (Morse) supra, 63 Cal. 2d at p. 264; and Hallisy v. W. C. A. B. (City & County of San Francisco) 33 Cal. A writ of review was denied (see City & County of San Francisco v. W. C. A. B. , supra, 32 Cal.
Note:	Comp. benefits for minor distinguishable from widow's; City gets credit for widow's, not minor's.
Citation:	269 Cal.App.2d 382, 34 CCC 97
WCC Citation:	WCC 25831969 CA

Case Name:	Clark v. CIGA		09/30/2011
Summary:	NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION O'LEARY, J. Kenneth Clark appeals from a judgment in favor of the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA). Clark filed this direct action against CIGA pursuant to Insurance Code section 115801 to recover his costs and interest. On September 24, 2003, CIGA issued Clark a check for $392,501 in partial satisfaction of the judgment. The trial court agreed with CIGA that pursuant to San Diego Housing, supra, 95 Cal. App. 4th 669, as a third party judgment creditor, Clark could not recover his costs and interest in a direct action against CIGA. Co. (1992) 5 Cal. App. 4th 1104, 1110-1111), the statutes governing CIGA exclude assigned claims from covered claims, and thus when pursuing recovery from CIGA, the option of obtaining assignment from the insured is not available in this case.
Note:	A third-party judgment creditor may not directly sue an insurer to recover costs and interest payable under a policy's supplemental payment provision.
Citation:	G044171
WCC Citation:	WCC 38062011 CA

Case Name:	Clark v. San Joaquin Community Hospital		06/21/2010
Summary:	Filed 6/21/10 Clark v. San Joaquin Community Hospital CA5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE 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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT BARBARA CLARK, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL et al. , Defendants and Appellants. In 1994, plaintiff Barbara Clark suffered an on-the-job injury while employed by defendant San Joaquin Community Hospital (San Joaquin) and, as a result, filed a workers' compensation claim. Clark was kicked by a patient while employed as a delivery nurse at San Joaquin. Defendant Adventist Health System/West (Adventist) operates as a not-for-profit California corporation and controls numerous health care facilities in the western United States, including San Joaquin.
Note:	[Unpublished] The trial court correctly concluded that attorney's letters were excludable under the litigation privilege of Civil Code section 47.
Citation:	F056620
WCC Citation:	WCC 36392010 CA

Case Name:	Clark v. WCAB		05/24/1991
Summary:	Mrs. Clark further testified that when Mr. Clark was ill she thought the illness might have been caused by his work for the Youth Authority. When Mr. Clark worked for the Youth Authority, he told Mrs. Clark he had to 'fire up' boilers insulated with asbestos, 'repair[] the asbestos that was [230 Cal. App. 3d 688] wrapped around the pipes,' and 'clean[] out' boilers that contained asbestos. Upon being asked when Dr. Rosen 'either told [Mrs. Clark] or told [her] husband and [her] husband then directed [Mrs. Clark] to file a claim,' Mrs. Clark testified: 'It seems to me that it was some time [sic] after my husband was first hospitalized in December of 1986. 'After Mrs. Clark answered the WCJ's question, her attorney objected on the grounds Mrs. Clark had testified Dr. Rosen told Mr. Clark to get an attorney in December 1986. The Board based this finding on the evidence that Mrs. Clark signed and read Mr. Clark's application during his life, that his application stated the injury occurred because of exposure to asbestos, that Mr. Clark was too ill to sign his application, and that Mr. Clark died three days after his application was filed.
Note:	'Asbestos worker' means any person whose job subjected him to an exposure to asbestos fibers.
Citation:	230 Cal.App.3d 684. 56 CCC 331
WCC Citation:	WCC 24571991 CA