Case Name:	State of CA v. WCAB (Butterworth)		01/31/1980
Summary:	In these three consolidated cases the petitioner, State of California, Department of Industrial Relations (hereafter State), challenges the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (hereafter WCAB) determination that parents of deceased workers are dependents entitled to death benefits. By virtue of this section the State claims entitlement to death benefits resulting from the deaths of the stewardesses. The State contests the award to the parents, contending that the parents have failed to establish partial dependency, thus entitling the State to the benefits. Since the State has failed to prove that it is entitled to benefits, we affirm the decision of the WCAB. Initially, of course, as we have held, the Legislature placed the burden upon the State; therefore, the State must meet the burden, however difficult.
Note:	State has burden of proving the deceased employee did not leave surviving anyone entitled to dependency death benefits.
Citation:	101 Cal.App.3d 673
WCC Citation:	WCC 24641980 CA

Case Name:	State of CA v. WCAB (Ellison)		04/03/1996
Summary:	Facts Nature of Order The order in question was made in connection with a grant of reconsideration by the Board at the request of the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF) and the state agency employer of the injured state worker. The state insures against its liability for compensation with SCIF pursuant to certain provisions of the Insurance Code. Code, §§ 11870, 11871, 11873; and see § 3700 ['Every employer except the state shall secure the payment of compensation . . . . ']. )The injured state worker, Shirley Ellison, was a correctional officer employed by the State Department of Corrections at the R. J. Donovan Correctional facility. Section 5814. 5 applies only to political subdivisions of the state, not the state itself.
Note:	WCAB jurisdiction to impose penalty for delay in pmt. of State's industrial disability indemnity.
Citation:	44 Cal.App.4th 128
WCC Citation:	WCC 24461996 CA

Case Name:	Steller v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.		10/14/2010
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX d Civil No. B219935 October 14, 2010 WENDY ANN STELLER, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. , DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. Wendy Ann Steller appeals from the judgment enforcing a settlement agreement between her and respondent, Sears Holdings Management Companys. The offer was made in the civil action and does not expressly mention the workers' compensation action. In June 2009 appellant filed a section 664. 6 motion for entry of a $95,000 judgment in the disability discrimination action. Respondent filed a cross-motion for entry of a judgment specifying "that the offer represents the settlement of [appellant's] .
Note:	When two parties seek to settle a civil action and a workers' compensation claim at a superior court settlement conference, the settlement must be conditioned upon the approval of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, the 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	B219935
WCC Citation:	WCC 36792010 CA

Case Name:	Stephany L. Kramer v. Turner Construction Company		12/13/2010
Summary:	STEPHANY L. KRAMER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Stephany L. Kramer is an electrician who was employed by a subcontractor on a construction project managed by defendant Turner Construction Company (Turner) as the general contractor. Kramer also sued Turner for her injury upon allegations that the general contractor's acts and omissions affirmatively contributed to the accident. Turner was the general contractor on a construction project at Laguna Honda Hospital in San Francisco. Turner did not tell Rosendin where to place the gang box, nor did Turner make any suggestions about its placement.
Note:	A general contractor is not responsible for injuries sustained by a subcontractor's employee while retrieving personal protective equipment because the general contractor did not control where the container with the equipment was located, California's First District Court of Appeals.
Citation:	A128063
WCC Citation:	WCC 36912010 CA

Case Name:	Stephens v. County of Tulare		05/25/2006
Summary:	05/25/2006) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA No. S129794 May 25, 2006 JOHN STEPHENS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF TULARE ET AL. , DEFENDANTS AND RESPONDENTS. Ct. App. 5 F044123 Tulare County Super. Attorneys for Respondent: Kathleen Bales-Lange, County Counsel, Ron Rezac, Chief Deputy County Counsel, and Crystal E. Sullivan, Deputy County Counsel, for Defendants and Respondents. Kathleen Bales-Lange, County Counsel (Tulare) and James G. Line, Deputy County Counsel, for Tulare County Employees' Retirement Association as Amicus Curie on behalf of Defendants and Respondents. Facts John Stephens began working for the Tulare County Sheriff-Coroner as a detention specialist III in December 1994. Stephens applied for a disability retirement with the Tulare County Employees' Retirement Association (TCERA) on November 18, 1998.
Note:	Dismissal of government employee under Government Code 31725 following industrial injuries requires severance of the employment relationship.
Citation:	38 Cal. 4th 793
WCC Citation:	WCC 31582006 CA

Case Name:	Stephenson vs. Argonaut Ins. Co.		12/23/2004
Summary:	Plaintiff Fred Stephenson, the trustee of Commercial Conservancy No. 1, is now doing business as Enniss (hereinafter collectively referred to as plaintiff). Plaintiff sued its general liability insurer, two insurance brokerages, an insurance agent, plus defendant Argonaut Insurance Company, its workers' compensation carrier. But in early 1998, Clarendon withdrew its defense predicated "on the basis that Guardado was a leased worker and . Defendant rejected this tender, in part, because "the Argonaut Policy does not include a duty to defend the Action. "Ultimately, Guardado recovered a $1. 75 million default judgment against plaintiff due to plaintiff's failure to comply with discovery orders.
Note:	Employer cannot recover civil damages against its workers'
Citation:	125 Cal. App. 4th 962
WCC Citation:	WCC 30722004 CA

Case Name:	Steward v. Board of Trustees of CSU		03/21/2013
Summary:	STEWARD v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORMA STEWARD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Norma Steward appeals from a judgment entered in favor of defendant Board of Trustees of the California State University (CSU). Steward's husband died from injuries he incurred as a result of the accident, and Steward suffered physical and emotional injuries. Procedural background Steward filed a complaint against Guseman and CSU on July 6, 2010, alleging a single cause of action for negligence. On December 5, 2011, the trial court entered a minute order granting judgment in favor of CSU.
Note:	A college dean's car accident, which resulted in the death of a pedestrian, while he was on his way to breakfast with a former colleague was not within the course and scope of his employment.
Citation:	D061558
WCC Citation:	WCC 39952013 CA

Case Name:	Stoddard vs. Western Employers Ins. Co.		04/12/1988
Summary:	JEFFREY STODDARD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WESTERN EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents (Opinion by Work, Acting P. J. , with Todd and Benke, JJ. , concurring. )Alleging damages from what he considered unreasonable delays in resolving his workers' compensation claims, Jeffrey Stoddard sued his employer's insurers, Western Employers Insurance Company (Western) and The Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers), for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of Insurance Code section 790. 03, subdivision (h). Stoddard reported this information to Western and Hamasaka. On October 7, 1981, a coemployee at S. J. Grove & Sons grabbed Stoddard around the waist and accidentally severely twisted his back. Stoddard did obtain an attorney, but both Western and the workers' compensation carrier for S. J. Grove & Sons, Travelers, refused to extend benefits.
Note:	Refusal to pay benefits does not take matter out of exclusive remedy bargain of workers' compensation.
Citation:	200 Cal.App.3d 165
WCC Citation:	WCC 29941988 CA

Case Name:	Stoilkov v. Yin		04/09/2018
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 FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO .             ALEXANDRE STOILKOV, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             YONG CHA YIN et al. , Defendants and Respondents. .             E066573 .             (Super. Ct. No. CIVRS1305829) .             OPINION .             APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Stoilkov asserted N&C Trucking owned the semi in which Stoilkov was sleeping at the time of the accident and therefore had a duty toward Stoilkov akin to a property owner, in the nature of premises liability. .           The trial court explained that Stoilkov was performing a work-related task for N&C Trucking at the time of the accident because the point of having Yim and Stoilkov in the semi was so that the semi could continue moving while either Yim or Stoilkov slept in the semi. .           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS .           MILLER Acting P. J.
Note:	A California appellate court upheld the dismissal of an injured truck driver’s tort claims against his employer and co-employee seeking damages for injuries from a motor vehicle accident.
Citation:	E066573
WCC Citation:	Super.Ct.No. CIVRS1305829

Case Name:	Stokes v. Patton State Hospital / Department of Mental Health / State of California		07/09/2007
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. SBR 0311485 KIMBERLY STOKES, Applicant, vs. PATTON STATE HOSPITAL / DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH / STATE OF CALIFORNIA, legally uninsured, administered by STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendant, OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION AMBULATORY SURGERY CENTER OF POMONA, Lien Claimant. Thus, the corporation, Pomona Surgery Center, Inc. , was not utilizing its corporate name but a fictitious business name. LICENSURE AND ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENTS The Legislature has determined that quality assurance is needed to ensure that outpatient surgical centers are safe and effective. However, there is a potential distinction between a "clinic" and an "outpatient setting" for purposes of licensure and accreditation. (e) Any health facility licensed as a general acute care hospital under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250).
Note:	To determine if a fictitious-name permit from the Medical Board is required it is necessary to distinguish between a 'clinic' that directly provides medical treatment and an 'outpatient setting' that does not.
Citation:	72 CCC 996
WCC Citation:	WCC 32342007 CA

Case Name:	Stress Care, Inc. v. WCAB		06/20/1994
Summary:	STRESS CARE, INC. , et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, NELSON DYEING AND FINISHING et al. , Respondents. We conclude that, because Dr. Moradi and Stress Care are not physicians, the WCJ erred in finding that they violated Labor Code section 4628. The report was prepared on the letterhead of Stress Care, Inc. , a corporation solely owned by Dr. Moradi. A clinical psychologist at Stress Care later prepared a report regarding psychological tests given to Mr. Macias. Both reports were submitted in Mr. Macias's workers' compensation proceeding, and Stress Care filed a lien claim in the amount of $4,830.
Note:	4628 requirements/penalties do not apply if not a 'physician'.
Citation:	26 Cal.App.4th 909
WCC Citation:	WCC 3991994 CA

Case Name:	Strong v. City & County of San Francisco		10/26/2005
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. SFO 0479038 OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) JACK C. STRONG, Applicant, vs. CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Permissibly Self-Insured, Defendant(s). BACKGROUND Jack C. Strong (applicant) sustained a series of industrial injuries while employed as a stationary engineer by the City and County of San Francisco (defendant). On December 8, 1999, a stipulated award issued, which found that this left knee injury caused permanent disability of 34-œ%. Applicant had another industrial injury on February 12, 1999, to his left shoulder, left knee, left ankle, and right wrist. At that time, the Legislature adopted former section 4750, whose language was substantially similar to the 1929 law, supra.
Note:	Apportionment for permanent disabilities to the same body region required only where the applicant fails to disprove overlap.
Citation:	70 CCC 1460
WCC Citation:	WCC 31292005 CA

Case Name:	Suarez v. Pacific Northstar Mechanical, Inc.		12/18/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR No. A121349 December 18, 2009 MIGUEL SUAREZ ET AL. , PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLANTS, v. PACIFIC NORTHSTAR MECHANICAL, INC. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In January 2005, appellants Miguel Suarez and Luis Avila were working for a construction company called All Bay Contractors, Inc. (All Bay). All Bay hired respondent Pacific Northstar Mechanical, Inc. (PNM) as a subcontractor to install only the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) components of the project. Unbeknownst to Suarez, the light fixture that was hanging from the I-bolt he grabbed was the ungrounded fixture. When Suarez grabbed the I-bolt, he immediately received an electric shock, fell off the ladder, and landed on Avila, resulting in injuries to both men.
Note:	Cal-OSHA statutes created a statutory duty of care for a subcontractor to warn a general contractor about a dangerous electric hazard that caused two workers to suffer severe injuries.
Citation:	A121349
WCC Citation:	WCC 35872009 CA

Case Name:	Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident Commission and Lois A. Patterson		05/29/1952
Summary:	2d 83; 244 P. 2d 889 May 29, 1952 SUBSEQUENT INJURIES FUND OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, PETITIONER, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION AND LOIS A. PATTERSON, RESPONDENTS PROCEEDING to review an order of the Industrial Accident Commission awarding compensation for personal injuries. Schauer [39 Cal2d Page 84] The Issues Involved The Subsequent Injuries Fund of the State of California seeks review of an award of the Industrial Accident Commission. The Industrial Accident Commission is to fix and award the amount of the last mentioned special additional compensation, and to direct the State Compensation Insurance Fund to pay it out of funds appropriated for the purpose. reimburse himself" for the cost of investigations, medical examinations, etc. , out of the Subsequent Injuries Fund. May 26, 1950: Employe served on the attorney general and filed application for adjustment of claim which joined the Subsequent Injuries Fund as a defendant.
Note:	The disputed claim is covered by section 5410 and is not barred.
Citation:	39 Cal. 2d 83
WCC Citation:	WCC 33601952 CA

Case Name:	Sullivan v. City of Huron et al.		03/28/2012
Summary:	DOUGLAS P. SULLIVAN et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF HURON et al. , Defendants and Respondents. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION CORNELL, J. Appellant Douglas P. Sullivan, a Fresno County deputy sheriff, and Michael Lyons, a police officer with the City of Huron (City), both responded to an office burglar alarm. Lyons released City's K-9 police dog to search for the burglar, but the dog attacked and injured Sullivan. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY The complaint alleges that Fresno County Deputy Sheriff Manuel Flores and Sullivan responded to an audible burglary alarm at an office building near the City of Huron in Fresno County. The dog left the building through the shattered glass door on the south wall and viciously attacked Sullivan, inflicting permanent injuries.
Note:	A deputy sheriff could not recover in tort for injuries inflicted by a police dog which attacked him while he was searching a burglarized building for intruders.
Citation:	F061294
WCC Citation:	WCC 38812012 CA

Case Name:	Sullivan's Stone Factory v. SCIF		05/20/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO SULLIVAN'S STONE FACTORY, INC. , Plaintiff and Appellant, v. STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiff Sullivan's Stone Factory, Inc. (Sullivan) acquired all of the assets of Cortima Co. (Cortima) at a tax lien sale. knew that Cortima had a high Experience Modification rating, because SCIF was providing worker's compensation insurance to Cortima . "Plaintiff had already acquired Cortima's assets at the time it applied for and obtained workers' compensation insurance from [SCIF]. However, as we also held in part III. C, ante, Sullivan did adequately allege that SCIF violated Insurance Code sections 330 through 339.
Note:	[Unpublished] Under a long line of case law, a defendant can be liable for failing to disclose information that is a matter of public record, provided the defendant's access to that information is superior to the plaintiff's access. Also, had information been disclosed to Plaintiff, it could have avoided being subject to prior owner's claims history by opting to self-insure or by promptly firing any of its employees who used to work for prior owner. It can't be said, as a matter of law, that Plaintiff could not have relied on the nondisclosure of publicly accessible information.
Citation:	E045493
WCC Citation:	WCC 35252009 CA

Case Name:	Sully-Miller Contracting Co. v. WCAB		07/03/1980
Summary:	SULLY-MILLER CONTRACTING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HAROLD A. SOMMER, Respondents. The important thing is that he not be given the false notion that he will be doing himself harm by doing physical activity. He should be reassured that the more he ignores the pain, the more quickly it will diminish and be less of a problem. 'According to Sommer, the operation of heaving construction equipment requires use of the arms and upper torso and this exacerbates his symptoms. In the proceedings directly under review, Sully-Miller sought reopening of Sommer's case in order to reduce the permanent disability award.
Note:	Case reopened after surveillance film showed empoyee doing work.
Citation:	107 Cal.App.3d 916
WCC Citation:	WCC 25961980 CA

Case Name:	Summers v. Newman		07/08/1999
Summary:	RICK B. SUMMERS et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. HERBERT F. NEWMAN et al. , Defendants; A. TEICHERT & SON, INC. , Intervener and Respondent. Facts In September 1992, while driving a truck in the course of his employment for A. Teichert & Son, Inc. (Teichert), Rick B. Summers was severely injured in a head-on collision with another truck. Teichert intervened in the action seeking reimbursement for the workers' compensation benefits it had provided to Summers. 2 and to give the employee an opportunity to recover personal injury damages in excess of the reimbursable compensation costs. Third, the employee receives any balance remaining from the settlement proceeds after payment of litigation costs and reimbursable compensation costs.
Note:	Employer and/or carrier must deduct attorney's fees from prop. share of third party settlement.
Citation:	20 Cal.4th 1021
WCC Citation:	WCC 24511999 CA

Case Name:	Sumner v. WCAB		06/02/1983
Summary:	BONNIE L. SUMNER, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, PFIZER, INC. , et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Grodin, J. , expressing the unanimous view of the court. )In the 13 years since Johnson was decided, the WCAB has failed to comply with our directive. Facts Petitioner and applicant Bonnie L. Sumner (hereinafter applicant) is the widow of Charles G. Sumner (employee) who died of a respiratory disease on March 23, 1980, at the age of 64. An order approving the compromise and release, as required by WCAB rules (Cal. Paragraph 11 of WCAB form 15 -- which must be used in a compromise and release agreement (Cal.
Note:	A worker may compromise death benefits of his survivors.
Citation:	33 Cal.3d 965
WCC Citation:	WCC 25591983 CA

Case Name:	Sun Indem. Co. v. Industrial Accident Comm'n		01/07/1926
Summary:	TYLER, P. J. Certiorari to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission in allowing compensation for injuries to one W. R. Doolittle, who, on the evening of February 18, 1925, was injured in an automobile accident. Round, proprietors of a general store at Costa Mesa, California, of whom petitioner is the insurance carrier, to manage their meat department. His hours of labor were from 7 A. M. to 6 or 6:15 in the evening. Part of his duties consisted in the buying of meats and in this connection he was vested with certain discretion. He was thrown through the windshield and suffered multiple lacerations of both hands, which injuries were of a serious nature.
Note:	Evidence supports finding that employee was injured in course and scope of employment.
Citation:	76 Cal.App. 165
WCC Citation:	WCC 30432026 CA

Case Name:	Sunderland v. Lockheed Martin		06/09/2005
Summary:	KRISTI SUNDERLAND et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. LOCKHEED MARTIN AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS SUPPORT COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiffs later amended their complaint to add Mazloom's employer, Lockheed Martin Aeronautical Systems Support Company (LMASSC), as a defendant. On the date of the collision, LMASSC, a Lockheed Martin Corporation subsidiary, employed Mazloom as a field service representative. Headquartered in Marietta, Georgia, LMASSC provides after-market technical field support to government and military customers which own and operate aircraft manufactured by Lockheed Martin Corporation. Costs on appeal are awarded to defendant Lockheed Martin Aeronautical Systems Support Company.
Note:	The commercial traveler rule may not be incorporated into the respondeat superior doctrine.
Citation:	130 Cal.App.4th 1
WCC Citation:	WCC 31032005 CA

Case Name:	Sunwest Masonry & Concrete Inc. v. Zamora - unpublished		02/01/2021
Summary:	* * * After suffering injuries on the job, followed by a stroke two months later, construction worker Jose Zamora filed a workers compensation claim against his former employer, Sunwest Masonry & Concrete, Inc. (Sunwest). Zamora then sued Sunwest for wrongful termination, and Sunwest and a third party for negligence. Zamora eventually settled his workers compensation claim and the wrongful termination action; he then voluntarily dismissed Sunwest from the negligence action with prejudice. About a week later, Zamora failed to show up for a job, and Sunwest stopped calling him in to work. According to Smaili, Zamora had no further need to maintain the negligence action against Sunwest after he successfully settled his workers compensation claim.
Note:	A California appellate court upheld a decision to strike an employer’s malicious prosecution claim against a former employee and his attorney for having pursued an allegedly meritless negligence action.
Citation:	No. G058685
WCC Citation:	No. G058685

Case Name:	Supervalu v. Wexford Underwriting Managers		06/03/2009
Summary:	Filed 6/3/09 Supervalu v. Wexford Underwriting Managers CA2/2 (Editor's note: This decision was originally unpublished, but was granted published status on June 22, 2009. )IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO SUPERVALU, INC. , Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WEXFORD UNDERWRITING MANAGERS, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Respondents. The issue presented is the interpretation of the word "occurrence" in the excess workers' compensation policies provided to appellant Supervalu, Inc. doing business as Albertson's Inc. (Supervalu) by respondents TIG Insurance Company (TIG), Continental Casualty Company (Continental) and Wexford Underwriting Managers, Inc. (Wexford) (collectively respondents). As to Continental and Wexford, Supervalu also alleged causes of action for breach of contract and bad faith. In an evidentiary vacuum, Supervalu states that the policies impose "an important duty on Wexford to transmit notice from [Supervalu] to the excess carrier.
Note:	[Unpublished] Policy language is not inconsistent with the apportionment of benefits envisioned by the provisions of the Labor Code.
Citation:	B206501
WCC Citation:	WCC 35312009 CA

Case Name:	Sutter Memorial Hospital v. WCAB		11/10/2008
Summary:	[U] Sutter Memorial Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, No. C058699 (Cal. App. Dist. 3 11/10/2008) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) No. C058699 November 10, 2008 SUTTER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, PETITIONER, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND GREEN & AZEVEDO, RESPONDENTS. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. Petitioner Sutter Memorial Hospital (Sutter) seeks reversal of a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) order denying reconsideration and restitution of attorney fees paid to respondent Green & Azevedo for its legal representation of the applicant Lucy Chaidez. The WCAB earlier reduced the applicant's permanent disability from 100 percent to 41 percent and ordered her to pay restitution to Sutter. In this proceeding, Sutter argues that the WCAB exceeded its powers in refusing to order Green & Azevedo to return $69,135 in attorney fees. In this case, the WCAB ordered the applicant to pay Sutter restitution in the sum of $60,092. 45 based on her misrepresentations to Dr. Kornblatt and the WCAB.
Note:	An employer is not entitled to restitution against attorneys who won $69,000 in attorney fees while unknowingly representing a fraudulent client.
Citation:	C058699
WCC Citation:	WCC 34602008 CA

Case Name:	Sutton v. WCAB		09/21/2007
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115. OPINION THE COURT*fn1 Petitioner William R. Sutton asks this court to annul a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) in which the WCAB remanded the matter for further development of the medical record to determine whether Sutton is entitled to medical treatment arising out of a 1985 stipulated award providing that future medical care "may be" required. At some point thereafter, the Employer contested its liability to provide medical treatment, and Sutton responded by petitioning the WCAB for penalties and attorney fees against the Employer for failing to provide medical treatment. The Employer petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration, contending Sutton never received an award for future medical care because the 1985 stipulation provided that additional medical care " `may be' " provided and then only " `upon reasonable demand. 'The WCAB found the precautionary award limited to the body areas specifically listed and upon Sutton making "a demand in advance of his need for treatment. "Although the WCAB rescinded the WCJ's findings ordering the Employer to provide six months of medical treatment, the WCAB has not yet issued a final determination whether medical evidence demonstrates Sutton requires continued medical treatment due to the 1983 injury and stipulated award.
Note:	[Unpublished] The ACOEM Guidelines presumptively establish reasonable medical treatment, regardless of the date of injury.
Citation:	F053104
WCC Citation:	WCC 32582007 CA

Case Name:	Sweeney v. WCAB		07/24/1968
Summary:	ROBERT D. SWEENEY, SR. , Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, FREDRICKSON & WATSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al. , Respondents. The record herein includes seven reports made by Dr. Feldman at various times to and including July 28, 1965. On February 13, 1964, petitioner was examined by Dr. Loopesko, at the request of the insurance carrier. On July 16, 1965, Dr. Feldman performed a lumbar laminectomy on petitioner, from 'L-4 to S-1,' removing a herniated disc. The other medical reports indicated that the disability was less severe and that the applicant was not so narrowly limited occupationally.
Note:	Matter remanded after WCAB relied on improper physician's report.
Citation:	264 Cal.App.2d 296
WCC Citation:	WCC 25631968 CA

Case Name:	T and T Construction v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and Curtis Ray Hillman		06/01/2012
Summary:	T and T Construction v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and Curtis Ray Hillman, Deceased, No. C067171 (Cal. App. Dist. 3 06/01/2012) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT C067171 June 1, 2012 T AND T CONSTRUCTION, PETITIONER, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND CURTIS RAY HILLMAN, DECEASED, ETC. , RESPONDENTS. Hillman's counsel filed a petition for serious and willful misconduct with the Board on August 20, 2009. We are not bound by the conclusions of the Board on questions of law, such as the interpretation of a statute. Petitioner's name appears throughout the record in many variations, including T&T Construction, TT Construction, and T and T Construction. We have elected to use the name as it appears on the order denying reconsideration, T and T Construction.
Note:	The act of filing a petition for workers' compensation benefits based on the alleged serious and willful misconduct of an employer is sufficient to 'commence' proceedings for purposes of the statute of limitations.
Citation:	C067171
WCC Citation:	WCC 39032012 CA

Case Name:	Tabaie v. Stockton Unified School Dist.		11/20/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) ---- BIJAN TABAIE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. STOCKTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent. That Bijan Tabaie was an employee of the Stockton Unified School District. That the Stockton Unified School District knew or thought Bijan Tabaie had a physical condition that limited a major life activity; "4. That Bijan Tabaie's physical condition was a motivating reason for the discharge, or [¶] [t]hat the Stockton Unified School District's belief that Bijan Tabaie had a physical condition was a motivating reason for the discharge. That the Stockton Unified School District's conduct was a substantial factor in causing Bijan Tabaie's harm. "
Note:	[Unpublished] Special instruction wrongly required the jury to decide issues of law and to engage in a burden-shifting analysis that is not to be performed by a jury at trial.
Citation:	C056222
WCC Citation:	WCC 35802009 CA

Case Name:	Tanimura v. Antle		11/21/2007
Summary:	Tanimura & Antle and its insurer petitioned this court for writ of review, and we granted the petition. Nor does he show that before 2005, Tanimura & Antle was required to provide notice under Labor Code section 4061, subdivision (a). The agreed medical examiner found Lopez to be permanent and stationary on January 13, 2006, and Tanimura & Antle made its last temporary disability payment on March 8, 2006. Filed 12/18/07 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TANIMURA & ANTLE, et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and AVELINO LOPEZ, Respondents. Trial Court: Santa Clara County W. C. A. B. No. SAL 108539 Attorneys for Petitioners: Daniel H. Hunt Tanimura & Antle et al. Matovich & McLean Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Michael A.
Note:	It is the date of proof of permanent disability, not the date of injury that determines whether a disability rating falls under the 2005 Permanent Disability Rating Schedule (PDRS) or the prior 1997 schedule.
Citation:	157 Cal. App. 4th 1489; 69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 127
WCC Citation:	WCC 32802007 CA

Case Name:	Tapia et al., v. Dresden et al.		08/30/2010
Summary:	Filed 8/30/10 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED In the Court of Appeal of the State of California Third Appellate District (Sacramento) C061925 (Superior Ct. No. 34200800024335CUPOGDS) Jorge Tapia et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Karl Dresden et al. , Defendants and Respondents. First, they asserted that because Jorges cause of action was precluded by the workers compensation exclusivity rule, Glorias cause of action was likewise precluded. The court concluded that the employee of an independent contractor may not sue the owner or hirer for injuries on the job. Also, while the Ungas did not have workers compensation coverage, workers compensation benefits were nonetheless available to Jorge. DISCUSSION I Standard Of Review The function of a demurrer is to test the sufficiency of the complaint by raising questions of law.
Note:	Exclusive remedy did not bar an injured worker's suit against a property owner because the general contractor on the job did not have a valid license or workers' compensation coverage, California's 3rd District Court of Appeal concluded.
Citation:	C061925
WCC Citation:	WCC 36612010 CA

Case Name:	Tapia v. Skill Master Staffing		09/17/2008
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Case No. ADJ 4564224 (En Banc) (LBO 0322121) MARIA TAPIA, Applicant, vs. SKILL MASTER STAFFING; and LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s), SB SURGERY CENTER, Lien Claimant. The new fee schedule for this procedure would be $1,770. 34. That would apply only to injuries on or after 1-1-04. Medicare ASC [Ambulatory Surgical Center], which was used in calculating the new fee schedule, would be $832. 49 for this procedure. A comparable procedure under the CHSWC study Level 5 (which was this procedure's level) would be an average of $2,196.
Note:	[En Banc] (1) An outpatient surgery center lien claimant has burden of proving that charges are reasonable; (2) the outpatient surgery center lien claimant's billing, by itself, does not establish that claimed fee is 'reasonable'; and (3) any evidence relevant to reasonableness may be offered to support or rebut the lien.
Citation:	4564224
WCC Citation:	WCC 34252008 CA

Case Name:	Target Stores v. WCAB		01/18/2008
Summary:	Filed 1/18/08 Target Stores v. WCAB (Sollars) CA5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS. -ooOoo- Target Stores (Target) petitions for a writ of review disputing a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) concluding that a 1994 stipulated award for further medical care contained a clerical error and that, regardless of the error, Target was estopped from terminating medical benefits it had been providing a former employee for over 11 years. Sollars stopped working for Target in June 1991 and began working as a receptionist with Sierra Medical Group. Target also argues the WCAB improperly considered Target's past payment for neck treatment an admission of liability and that it should not have relied upon Dr. Chittenden's medical reporting lacking substantial evidence. (1987) 194 Cal. App. 3d 784 (Robinson), Target contends there were no legal grounds for the WCAB to withdraw or set aside the 1994 stipulated award.
Note:	[Unpublished] The WCAB may interpret and enforce a prior award.
Citation:	F053581
WCC Citation:	WCC 33032008 CA

Case Name:	Tate v. IAC		10/19/1953
Summary:	On rehearing it developed that the district manager of the employer not only knew that Tate was drinking, but participated with Tate in the drinking and purchased at least one round of drinks. The facts, in more detail, are as follows: Ernest Tate was employed as a janitor and supervising employee by the American Building Maintenance Company, a self-insured employer. The employer raised the affirmative defense that death was caused by the intoxication of Tate. Tate then made a telephone call and he and Deardorff left Allison's home for San Francisco at 2:30 a. m. Allison stated he did not believe that Tate was then drunk, or he would not have allowed him to leave. Allison also stated that Tate had worked for this same employer for seven or eight years; that about three or four months before the accident Tate had been warned about four to six times about drinking on the job.
Note:	On rehearing, petitioner for rehearing may raise any point he could have raised in original hearing.
Citation:	120 Cal.App.2d 657
WCC Citation:	WCC 26961953 CA

Case Name:	Telles Transport v. WCAB (Zuniga)		10/16/2001
Summary:	TELLES TRANSPORT, INC. et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and LUIS ZUNIGA, Respondents. OPINION CORNELL, J. Telles Transport, Inc. (Telles) petitions this court by a writ of review challenging the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB or Board). Although the documents were not offered into evidence, Telles apparently had its own copy of the relevant UMC records. The WCAB disagreed with the WCJ and found the WCJ had a duty to develop fully the record by admitting the relevant UMC records. 1 Zuniga maintains the WCAB acted within its authority in ordering the WCJ to admit the previously undisclosed UMC records.
Note:	Where a party's own conduct caused or induced the error he is estopped from appealing the issue of that error.
Citation:	92 Cal.App.4th 1159
WCC Citation:	WCC 28182001 CA

Case Name:	Tenet/Centinela Hosp. Med. Ctr. v. Rushing		05/18/2000
Summary:	Dr. Glousman treated Rushing continuously beginning in August 1995, performing surgery twice on her right knee and conducting follow-up care. In the category of 'Treatment Recommendations,' Dr. Glousman wrote that Rushing 'will continue on a home exercise program. 'As Rushing was not represented at the time, the hospital followed the requirements of Labor Code section 4061, subdivision (d), and provided her with a three-physician panel. The WCJ effectively ruled that Dr. Stokes was the primary treating physician, rationalizing that Rushing was entitled to change treating physicians when future medical care is warranted. Rushing seeks an award of supplementary attorney fees predicated on the assertion there was no reasonable basis for this petition for review.
Note:	When applicant P&S, must comply with 4061/4062 before obtaining new treating physician.
Citation:	80 C.A.4th 1041, 65 CCC 477
WCC Citation:	WCC 24052000 CA

Case Name:	Tenet/Doctors Medical Center v. WCAB		03/24/2008
Summary:	Filed 3/24/08 Tenet/Doctors Medical Center v. WCAB (Reddick) CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN 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 FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE TENET/DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER, etc. , et al. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and BONNIE REDDRICK, Respondent. BACKGROUND While employed as an admitting clerk by petitioner Tenet/Doctors Medical Center (Tenet), respondent Bonnie Reddrick injured her hand and wrist. Among other things, this legislation amended section 4660 to require the implementation of a new permanent disability rating schedule incorporating the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (5th ed. 'Permanent and stationary status' is the point when the employee has reached maximal medical improvement, meaning his or her condition is well stabilized, and unlikely to change substantially in the next year with or without medical treatment. "
Note:	[Unpublished] A medical-legal report issued before January 1, 2005 need not state that that the claimant is permanent and stationary in order to trigger the old rating schedule. It is only necessary that a pre-2005 report indicate that the claimant has suffered a permanent impairment of earning capacity, a permanent impairment of the normal use of a body part, or a permanent competitive handicap in the open market. See Genlyte Group, Inc. v. WCAB, (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 705.
Citation:	A118238
WCC Citation:	WCC 33292008 CA

Case Name:	Tensfeldt v. WCAB		08/20/1998
Summary:	GARY TENSFELDT, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondents. [66 Cal. App. 4th 119] OPINION PETERSON, P. J. - Petitioner Gary Tensfeldt (Tensfeldt) was convicted of insurance fraud under Insurance Code section 1871. 4, subdivision (a)(1), fn. Upon completion, Lynch drove Tensfeldt and another crew member to a City gymnasium where they joined other water department employees to play basketball. Upon learning that the investigation was complete, Tensfeldt met with the police on April 22, 1994, and revealed the true nature of the injury. In a two-to-one opinion the Board held that Tensfeldt was barred under section 1871. 5 from 'receiving or retaining any workers' compensation benefits. '
Note:	Conviction of fraud bars applicant from receiving any compensation under 3207.
Citation:	66 Cal. App. 4th 116
WCC Citation:	WCC 4021998 CA

Case Name:	Terra Linda Farms, Inc., et al v. California Fair Employment and Housing Commission		01/19/2012
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT F059869 January 19, 2012 TERRA LINDA FARMS, INC. , ET AL. , PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLANTS, v. CALIFORNIA FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING COMMISSION ET AL. , DEFENDANTS AND RESPONDENTS; MARIBEL RIVAS ET AL. , REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST AND RESPONDENTS. The Commission had found the companies violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq. FACTS Terra Linda Farms, Inc. , Terra Linda Farms, a general partnership, and Terra Linda Packing (collectively, Terra Linda), filed this administrative mandamus proceeding. Terra Linda's writ petition named the Commission and the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (the Department) as defendants. During the 1995 onion season, they worked directly for Terra Linda and their paychecks came from Terra Linda.
Note:	Substantial evidence supported a Fair Employment and Housing Commission decision to award two female workers $96,575 in damages.
Citation:	F059869
WCC Citation:	WCC 38452012 CA

Case Name:	Tevis v. Spare Time Part 1/2		10/16/2017
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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) .             KELLY TEVIS, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             SPARE TIME, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Respondents. .             C074938 .             (Super. .           Six months after she was hired as an assistant marketing director at Spare Time’s Lodi facility, Spare Time promoted plaintiff to be a marketing director at the Natomas Racquet Club. .           We, therefore, will put a wider lens on the facts Spare Time characterize as undisputed and fatal to her claims. Tevis testified that she did not start to feel better until October or November 2010. ” .           “153.
Note:	A California appellate court revived a worker’s disability discrimination claim after she allegedly suffered a psychological injury because of pervasive harassment by her supervisor.
Citation:	C074938
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. 34201100116411CUWTGDS

Case Name:	Tevis v. Spare Time Part 2/2		10/16/2017
Summary:	.           Finally, Spare Time insists plaintiff admitted she never asked for any kind of accommodation, including separation from Rose. Whether it was explicit or implicit, Spare Time was certainly on notice that plaintiff perceived Rose as an ongoing threat and sought to be separated from him. Plaintiff presented sufficient circumstantial evidence that Spare Time’s asserted reason for discharging her was pretextual and that a trier of fact is needed to determine Spare Time’s true motives. According to plaintiff, in April Sierra had assured her Spare Time was conducting a thorough investigation of her charges. .         Plaintiff contends Spare Time has not established the lack of retaliatory animus as a matter of law.
Note:	A California appellate court revived a worker’s disability discrimination claim after she allegedly suffered a psychological injury because of pervasive harassment by her supervisor.
Citation:	C074938
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. 34201100116411CUWTGDS

Case Name:	The Earthgrains Co. v. WCAB (Hansen)		07/03/2008
Summary:	The Earthgrains Company (Earthgrains) petitions this court for a writ of review from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). *fn2 All three awards stated Earthgrains would provide further medical care to cure or relieve the effects of the injuries. After Earthgrains petitioned for reconsideration, the WCJ issued an amendment to the findings and award. The WCAB thereafter summarily denied the petition for reconsideration based on the reasoning set forth by the WCJ's Report and Recommendation. Filing an Application for Adjudication establishes jurisdiction with the WCAB to initiate proceedings for the collection of workers' compensation benefits.
Note:	[Unpublished] From the WCAB's opinion and the evidence provided with the petition for writ of review, it is impossible to determine the WCAB's basis for concluding Hansen became permanent and stationary on August 24, 2006.
Citation:	F054600
WCC Citation:	WCC 33922008 CA

Case Name:	The People v. Crystal Caldwell		04/20/2011
Summary:	Defendant Crystal Caldwell was found guilty of two felonies -- workers' compensation insurance fraud (Ins. BACKGROUND In June 2008, Caldwell was employed by Los Angeles Community College District as a secretary at Los Angeles Mission College. Mark Shoup conducted the surveillance and made a video recording of Caldwell on two Saturdays, July 19 and 26, 2008. =====FOOTNOTES===== *fn1 Zwick first learned that Caldwell had retained an attorney on June 24, 2008, 18 days after the injury. At the sentencing and probation hearing, Caldwell asked for a restitution hearing to determine exactly what was spent on medical treatment, in light of the People's concession that Caldwell did suffer an injury.
Note:	An applicant must serve a sentence of at least three years on formal probation for workers' compensation fraud and attempted perjury, thanks to a claims examiner's hunch and surveillance video.
Citation:	B222055
WCC Citation:	WCC 37492011 CA

Case Name:	The People v. Guillen		05/11/2017
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 SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             HARIBERTO GUILLEN, Defendant and Appellant. .             H043599 .             (Santa Clara County Super. .             On appeal, we appointed counsel to represent defendant in this court. .             In People v. Serrano (2012) 211 Cal. App. 4th 496 (Serrano), this court concluded that Wende review is limited to the defendant’s first appeal of right from a criminal conviction (Serrano, supra, at p. 503). .           WE CONCUR: .           __________________________ ELIA, ACTING P. J. .           __________________________ MIHARA, J.
Note:
Citation:	H043599
WCC Citation:	Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. C157980

Case Name:	The People v. Kinya Jeanette Atlas-Hearn		04/22/2011
Summary:	Defendant also contends the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's implied finding that defendant harbored the intent necessary to commit the charged crimes. Defendant asked to be relieved so she could go to the clinic to obtain medical aid. Defendant's request was granted and as a result she returned to the office where she reported her injury to a company field supervisor. Defendant signed a workers' compensation claim form that described her injury as head and neck tension and pain. Defendant also claimed at trial as she does on appeal that a man with a cane called her a bitch.
Note:	A trial court did not err by failing to give jury instructions that explained the rules regarding use of circumstantial evidence in the trial of a bus driver accused of workers' compensation fraud because the prosecution relied on direct evidence.
Citation:	E049871
WCC Citation:	WCC 37522011 CA

Case Name:	The People v. Newman		06/02/2017
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 SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             DAVE ARNESS NEWMAN, Defendant and Appellant. .             H042192 .             (Santa Clara County Super. .             Defendant now appeals from the judgment of conviction. .             Defendant’s friend, John Greene, owned a business that “schedule[d] officials for sporting events. ” Defendant worked as a referee for Greene. .           ________________________________ RUSHING, P. J. .           WE CONCUR: .           ___________________________________ PREMO, J.
Note:
Citation:	H042192
WCC Citation:	Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. C1116412

Case Name:	The People v. Riddles		03/23/2017
Summary:	Filed 3/23/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             JOHN PAUL RIDDLES, Defendant and Appellant. .             D069419 .             (Super. .             In this case, defendant and appellant John Paul Riddles pled guilty to one count of workers' compensation insurance fraud in violation of Insurance Code1 section 11760, subdivision (a). .           Initially, following a restitution hearing, the court ordered Riddles to pay FCI $52,259 in restitution. .           WE CONCUR: .           NARES, J.
Note:
Citation:	D069419
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. SCD238770

Case Name:	The People v. Snow		05/31/2017
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115(a).   COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             SARA CHARIS SNOW, Defendant and Appellant. .             D070425 .             (Super. .             A jury convicted Sara Charis Snow of three counts of workers' compensation fraud (Ins. .           Later that month, Snow sought treatment from Glenn Nusbaum, D. C. , who became her primary treating doctor. .           During his AME assessment of Snow, Dr. Previte questioned her regarding her "domestic functioning. "
Note:
Citation:	D070425
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. SCD260150

Case Name:	The Traveler's Property Casualty Company of America v. Actavis, Inc. Part 1/2		06/11/2017
Summary:	Filed 11/06/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             THE TRAVELER’S PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, .             v. .             ACTAVIS, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Appellants. .             G053749 .             (Super. .             Blank Rome, Elizabeth B. Kim and James R. Murray for Defendants and Appellants. [¶] . [¶] .
Note:	The 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled that two commercial general liability insurance carriers have no obligation to defend a group of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors from lawsuits in California and Illinois over their alleged deceptive marketing practices for opioid medications.
Citation:	G053749
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. 30-2014-00746842

Case Name:	The Traveler's Property Casualty Company of America v. Actavis, Inc. Part 2/2		06/11/2017
Summary:	.           Watson argues the Products Exclusions are ambiguous due to an exception in section 2. d(3) of the Travelers Policies. .           FYBEL, J.   .           WE CONCUR: .           BEDSWORTH, ACTING P. J. .           MOORE, J. Appellants are Actavis, Inc. , Actavis LLC, Actavis Pharma, Inc. , Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , Watson Laboratories, Inc. , and Watson Pharma, Inc. The parties refer to the appellants collectively as Watson, and, for the sake of consistency, we shall do the same. Significantly, both the St. Paul and Travelers Property Products Exclusion provisions encompass statements/representations that were made or that should have been [made] regarding Watson’s products.
Note:	The 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled that two commercial general liability insurance carriers have no obligation to defend a group of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors from lawsuits in California and Illinois over their alleged deceptive marketing practices for opioid medications.
Citation:	G053749
WCC Citation:	Super. Ct. No. 30-2014-00746842

Case Name:	Thomas v. City of Los Angeles		12/06/2012
Summary:	THOMAS v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES MALCOLM THOMAS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and Appellant. Carmen A. Trutanich, City Attorney, Claudia McGee Henry, Assistant City Attorney, and Gregory P. Orland, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendant and Appellant. Plaintiff Malcolm Thomas (Thomas), a police officer in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), brought suit against the City of Los Angeles (City) for disability discrimination and related claims. [The City] failed to engage in an interactive process with [Thomas] and acted in an unreasonable and hostile manner towards [Thomas] and his disabilities. Thomas further alleges that "[a]s a proximate result of [the City's] discrimination, [the City] also denied promotion and/or job benefits to [Thomas].
Note:	The 2nd District Court of Appeals overturned a $705,804 verdict in favor of a former Los Angeles police officer on his disability discrimination claims based on prejudicial errors in the instructions issued to the jury at trial.
Citation:	B229265
WCC Citation:	WCC 39562012 CA