Case Name:	Clark v. WCAB		05/09/2008
Summary:	-ooOoo- *Before Wiseman, Acting P. J. , Cornell, J. , and Kane, J. Barbara Clark petitions this court for a writ of review from an "Opinion and Orders Dismissing Petition for Reconsideration and Denying Removal" of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). In December 2001, both Clark and the Hospital concurrently petitioned this court for writs of review from a November 6, 2001, WCAB opinion and order granting reconsideration. "As our court Clerk/Administrator notified Clark previously, there are no legal grounds for this court to further review a decision of the WCAB. Apparently unhappy with the order, Clark refused and instead petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration and removal of the WCJ. Clark then asks this court to annul the February 29, 2008, WCAB decision and to remand the matter to the "WCAB with instructions to use their discretionary powers and remove this case to themselves. "
Note:	[Unpublished] A writ of review only inquires into the lawfulness of the orders, decisions, and awards issued by the WCAB. A federal court's decision to declare claimant a vexatious litigant and to subject her to a pre-filing order is beyond the state appellate court's jurisdiction to review.
Citation:	F054828
WCC Citation:	WCC 33522008 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:	Dependents' rights to death benefits are independent of and severable from rights of deceased employee.
Citation:	230 Cal.App.3d 684, 56 CCC 331
WCC Citation:	WCC 25201991 CA

Case Name:	Clark v. WCAB (San Joaquin Community Hosp.)		11/16/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT BARBARA CLARK, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, et al. , Respondents. Law Offices of Dennis J. Hershewe and Dennis J. Hershewe, for Respondents San Joaquin Community Hospital and Adventist Health System -- West. (d)), this court recalls Clark worked as a registered nurse for San Joaquin Community Hospital (Hospital) when she sustained an admitted industrial injury on February 16, 1994, to her "head, jaw, teeth, neck, headaches, and psyche. "In December 2001, both Clark and the Hospital concurrently petitioned this court for writs of review from a November 6, 2001, WCAB opinion and order granting reconsideration. As our court Clerk/Administrator notified Clark previously, there are no legal grounds for this court to further review a decision of the WCAB.
Note:	[Unpublished] There are no grounds for this court to further review a decision of the WCAB.
Citation:	F054070
WCC Citation:	WCC 32792007 CA

Case Name:	Claxton v. Waters		08/30/2004
Summary:	CAROLYN CLAXTON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. RAY WATERS et al. , Defendants and Respondents. I From February 1995 until her resignation in September 1997, Carolyn Claxton worked as an office assistant for defendant Pacific Maritime Association (PMA). On January 16, 1998, Claxton filed a second and separate workers' compensation claim against PMA for injury to "psyche due to sexual harassment. "On September 15, 1998, Claxton filed this civil action against PMA and Waters alleging, as relevant here, sexual harassment in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq. ). In support of that motion, Claxton submitted declarations by herself and by the attorney who had represented her in the workers' compensation proceedings.
Note:	C&R does not release civil claims unless intent of the parties clearly expressed in the document.
Citation:	Unpublished
WCC Citation:	WCC 30202004 CA

Case Name:	CNA Ins. Co. v. WCAB (Valdez)		07/22/1997
Summary:	CNA Insurance Companies, Petitioner v. Workers Compensation Appeals Board, William Lehrich, DPM, (Geni R. Valdez), Respondents. Applicant alleged that she sustained industrial injuries and her claim was denied by the carrier. The case in chief was settled by C&R for $12,000, WCAB reserving jurisdiction over disputed liens. CNA lost on reconsideration and their Petition for Writ of Review was denied. You are counseled to consult the full case for an accurate citation.
Note:	Official Medical Fee Schedule does not apply to self-procured treatment.
Citation:	62 CCC 1145 (Writ Denied)
WCC Citation:	WCC 28801997 CA

Case Name:	Co. of San Luis Obispo v. WCAB (Barnes)		10/03/2001
Summary:	Finnegan, Marks & Hampton, Ellen Sims Langille, Renee M. Bertenthal for Petitioner County of San Luis Obispo. On remand, the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) awarded Barnes one section 5814 penalty for delay in making the $97. 87 penalty payment. DISCUSSION 'In considering a petition for writ of review of a decision of the WCAB, this court's authority is limited. This court must determine whether the evidence, when viewed in light of the entire record, supports the award of the WCAB. (1996) 44 Cal. App. 4th 128, 139-140 (Ellison) [WCAB can consider size of a delinquency to determine whether the employer acted unreasonably]. )
Note:	$65K penalty on delayed payment $97.87 unreasonable.
Citation:	92 Cal. App. 4th 869
WCC Citation:	WCC 28172001 CA

Case Name:	Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc et al. v. WCAB and Isaac Espinosa		04/25/2011
Summary:	COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES INC. et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and ISAAC ESPINOZA, Respondents. Louis A. Larres Bradford & Barthel, LLP, Counsel for Petitioners Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. and Sedgwick CMS. )Section 4650, subdivision (d) provides for an automatic 10 percent penalty on a late TTD payment. (1997) 56 Cal. App. 4th 902, 910-912 [penalty for "failure to pay at the correct adjusted statutory rate of TTD"]; Jardine v. Workers' Comp. (1984) 163 Cal. App. 3d 1, 4-5, 7-8 [penalty for payment at permanent partial disability rate rather than permanent total disability rate]; Smith v. Workers' Comp.
Note:	The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board miscalculated the amount of a Labor Code Section 5814 penalty by erroneously concluding that a regulation required the employer to pay maximum temporary total disability benefits unless it had documentation that showed the injured worker's actual pre-injury wages, the California 1st District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	A131011
WCC Citation:	WCC 37552011 CA

Case Name:	Code of Civil Procedure 704.160		01/01/2000
Summary:	(a) Except as provided by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4900) of Part 3 of Division 4 of the Labor Code, before payment, a claim for workers' compensation or workers' compensation awarded or adjudged is exempt without making a claim. Except as specified in subdivision (b), after payment, the award is exempt. (1) 'Judgment debtor' or 'support judgment debtor' means a person who is owing a duty of support. (2) 'Judgment creditor' or 'support judgment creditor' means the person to whom support has been ordered to be paid. (3) 'Support' refers to an obligation owing on behalf of a child, spouse, or family; or an amount owing pursuant to Section 17402 of the Family Code.
Note:	Application of temporary disability to satisfy child support award.
Citation:	CCP 704.160
WCC Citation:	WCC 28142000 CA

Case Name:	Coffman v. East Bay Municipal Utility District		09/12/2017
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             DAVID COFFMAN, Applicant, .             v. .             EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, Defendant. .           Labor Code section 4662 provides that: .           "Any of the following permanent disabilities shall be conclusively presumed to be total in character: .           (a) Loss of both eyes or the sight thereof. .           WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD .           MARGUERITE SWEENEY .           ICONCUR, .           FRANK M. BRASS .           I DISSENT. (SEE ATTACHED DISSENTING OPINION) .           DEIDRA E. LOWE .           DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA .           SEP 12 20'7 DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER LOWE  .           I respectfully dissent. .           DEIDRA E. LOWE, COMMISSIONER .           DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA .           SEP I' 2 2017
Note:
Citation:	ADJ3821371 (OAK 0345422)
WCC Citation:	ADJ3821371 (OAK 0345422) ADJ3491292 (OAK 0345

Case Name:	Cohen v. CDCR		12/22/2011
Summary:	*fn1 CDCR contends: 1) Cohen was not a qualified individual, because there was no evidence that her attendance would have been sufficient to meet the requirements of her job even with accommodation; and 2) CDCR provided reasonable accommodation for Cohen's disability as a matter of law. In Pope's experience working with Cohen previously, she had found Cohen to be an exceptional clinician. To relieve Cohen from walking around the yard, Cohen and Pope agreed that Pope would interview prisoners and Cohen would do the research in their charts. On May 14, 2010, the jury found that CDCR did not discriminate against Cohen on account of her disability, nor did CDCR retaliate against Cohen. However, CDCR contends that there is no substantial evidence to support the jury's findings that Cohen is a qualified individual and CDCR failed to reasonably accommodate her disability.
Note:	The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation failed to reasonably accommodate a staff psychologist's severe anemia by making her walk long distances to the areas where she had to perform her job duties, a California appellate court ruled.
Citation:	B226762
WCC Citation:	WCC 38362011 CA