Case Name:	Spatafore & Wheeler v. WCAB		09/08/1987
Summary:	Spatafore & Wheeler, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California; W. G. Nolan Plastering, Inc. ; and State Compensation Insurance Fund, Respondents. Cases 1065], payable to Spatafore & Wheeler. Permanent disability indemnity in accordance with paragraph 3 above, less the sum of $ 5,000. 00 payable to applicant's attorney as the reasonable value of services rendered and commuted per Goler and paid per [Labor Code section] 4903 to Spatafore & Wheeler . . . Spatafore petitioned for reconsideration of the Board's decision, contending that the reasonable value of Spatafore's services is $ 5,000 and that Spatafore should have been afforded a hearing before the WCJ's commutation order was rescinded. Spatafore appended to its petition a detailed summary of its services performed in obtaining the award.
Note:	Commuting an atty. fee requires a board hearing on 'appropriateness' factors.
Citation:	52 CCC 412
WCC Citation:	WCC 26161987 CA

Case Name:	Spinks v. EQR-Briarwood		10/18/2012
Summary:	According to Brown, Mobile Medical offered to have someone pack up Spinks' belongings and also offered to fly her back to her home in Texas, but Spinks refused. Tauala offered to find an apartment for Spinks but Spinks replied that she had already made a hotel reservation at the Tropicana Lodge in Palo Alto. Tauala also offered to look into obtaining government assistance for Spinks, but Spinks declined that offer. Spinks' mother, who was staying with Spinks after her surgery, was also present in the apartment. (Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood Apartments (2009) 171 Cal. App. 4th 1004, 1057 (Spinks I). )
Note:	A temporary worker who was kicked out of her employer-provided apartment after she could no longer work because of an on-the-job injury had abandoned the property and had no cause of action against her former employer.
Citation:	H036448
WCC Citation:	WCC 39412012 CA

Case Name:	St. Paul Travelers Ins. Co. v. Mark Davis Masonry, Inc.		02/14/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE ST. PAUL TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARK DAVIS MASONRY, INC. , Defendant and Appellant. * * * INTRODUCTION St. Paul Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) paid money to settle a personal injury lawsuit. On September 11, 1999, Darren McLaren and Mark Davis, employees of MDM, were injured when scaffolding erected by Waco collapsed. McLaren, Davis, and Davis's wife filed a personal injury action against RAS, Waco, and other subcontractors on May 4, 2000. The trial court also ruled Travelers could recover the attorney fees it incurred in the indemnity case, and invited Travelers to submit a request for those fees.
Note:	[Unpublished] A party seeking nonstatutory costs or expenses (such as expert witness fees) under a contractual prevailing-party attorney fees clause must plead and prove its entitlement to those costs or expenses. Travelers failed to do so.
Citation:	G037661
WCC Citation:	WCC 33172008 CA

Case Name:	Stanley v. Richmond		06/14/1995
Summary:	These claims against respondents Diana Richmond (Richmond or respondent) and her law firm, Richmond & Chamberlin (collectively, hereinafter, respondents), arose out of a dissolution proceeding in which Richmond represented appellant, and C. Rick Chamberlin (Chamberlin), an attorney with whom Richmond was in the process of forming a new law firm, represented appellant's husband, Dr. John Stanley (Dr. Stanley). Later the same day, however, appellant called Richmond back to say she had struck a deal with the Nossaman firm and to propose paying Dr. Stanley "$250,000 via a loan. "Apparently, Chamberlin also informed Richmond that, if appellant obtained a $250,000 bank loan, Dr. Stanley might be willing to take a note from appellant for the $110,000 balance. Stanley further testified that she understood "taking offices together" to mean that Richmond and Chamberlin would be renting space in the same building as Richmond had done with the Nossaman firm but not that they would be starting a new law firm together. She informed Richmond that she considered Dr. Stanley's and Chamberlin's pursuit of the motion to compel sale to be sanctionable in the circumstances, and admonished Richmond to "[b]e an advocate. "
Note:	The appellant established a prima facie case of breach of fiduciary duty, professional negligence, and breach of contract.
Citation:	A062468
WCC Citation:	WCC 37311995 CA

Case Name:	Starving Students Inc vs. Dept of Indust Relations		01/24/2005
Summary:	STARVING STUDENTS, INC. , Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT, Defendant and Respondent. OPINION KRIEGLER, J. - Appellant Starving Students, Inc. (Employer) appeals from a judgment denying its petition for writ of mandate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1094. 5. However, the DLSE presented evidence that Kemper had not agreed to provide coverage to Employer through their policy with Omni. On March 19, 2003, the deputy labor commissioner visited Employer's office and cited Employer for violating the stop work order. [¶] (b) By securing from the Director of Industrial Relations a certificate of consent to self-insure .
Note:	Dept of Labor Stds Enforcement does not have discretion to withdraw penalty assessed against employer insured by unauthorized carrier.
Citation:	125 Cal. App. 4th 1357
WCC Citation:	WCC 30742005 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Fund v. WCAB (Guzman) CA6		01/30/2018
Summary:	State Compensation Fund v. WCAB (Guzman)
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that a construction worker was not entitled to benefits for a psychiatric injury from an accident where his compacter overturned.
Citation:	H044300
WCC Citation:	W.C.A.B. No. ADJ6839277

Case Name:	State Compensation Ins. Fund v. Notis Enterprises		06/07/2010
Summary:	FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY The State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) was created in 1914 to issue workers' compensation policies to employers. The premium for the 2004 policy was calculated by the State Fund to be $497,265. 48. State Fund claims that Notis failed to pay the premium for the 2004 policy. State Fund assigned its claim against Notis to Collecto, Inc. Collecto filed a complaint against Notis for goods and services sold and delivered, account stated, and open book account. Each is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the assignment by State Fund to Collecto, and the reassignment to State Fund. Notis asserts: "Even if the account was properly transferred to Collecto from State Fund, then how is State Fund conducting re-audits of the account on 'March 10, 2008' when it transferred the account in 2006?," citing a declaration by an employee of State Fund filed in the trial court.
Note:	[Unpublished] Discovery order upheld.
Citation:	B213079
WCC Citation:	WCC 36362010 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Ins. Fund v. Zamora		03/21/2011
Summary:	STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND v. NANCY H. ZAMORA No. 10-796. Supreme Court of United States. March 21, 2011. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Note:	The U.S. Supreme Court will not review a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that allowed a bankruptcy trustee to recoup a $101,531 restitution payment made to State Compensation Insurance Fund.
Citation:	10-796
WCC Citation:	WCC 37332011 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Sana Khan		01/27/2018
Summary:	  Plaintiff-Appellant State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendants-Appellees. Specifically, State Fund had the opportunity to be heard regarding the validity of the 2009 Settlement before the arbitrator and decided to negotiate the superseding 2010 Settlements instead. State Fund had the opportunity to investigate the fraudulence of the Zaks Entities’ billings before entering into the 2010 Settlements and did so in depth, with the help of outside counsel. State Fund then had the opportunity to contest the fairness of the 2010 Settlements before the     arbitrator as well, and did not.   Finally, State Fund failed to take the additional steps required to effect rescission under California law.
Note:	Broad liability releases in lien settlements prevent California’s State Compensation Insurance Fund from suing Accident Help Line and providers that the carrier says overbilled for medical treatment.
Citation:	No. 16-55501
WCC Citation:	D.C. No. 8:12-cv-01072-CJC-JCG

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WallDesign, Inc.,		10/20/2011
Summary:	STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND v. WALLDESIGN INCORPORATED STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WALLDESIGN INCORPORATED, Defendant and Respondent. INTRODUCTION State Compensation Insurance Fund (the Fund) provided workers' compensation insurance to WallDesign Incorporated (WallDesign) under two insurance policies. WallDesign failed to pay the premium the Fund claimed was owing; the amount of the final premium was determined through an audit of WallDesign's records by the Fund. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Fund issued two workers' compensation insurance policies to WallDesign. DeLeon filed a first amended complaint on May 17, 2010, seeking $1,045,905. 35 in damages for the unpaid workers' compensation premium.
Note:	The four-year statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit to collect unpaid premium begins running after the insurer completes an audit and demands payment, if the policy states those terms, the California 4th District Court of Appeal ruled on Thursday in a case of first impression.
Citation:	G044354
WCC Citation:	WCC 38142011 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WCAB (Guzman)		01/30/2018
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT .             STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Petitioner, .             v. .             WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JOSE A. GUZMAN, Respondents. .             H044300 .             (W. C. A. B. No. ADJ6839277) I. )1 Petitioner State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), the workers’ compensation carrier for Guzman’s employer, petitioned for reconsideration. .             For reasons that we will explain, we agree with SCIF. .           WE CONCUR: .           __________________________ ELIA, ACTING P. J. .           __________________________ MIHARA, J.
Note:
Citation:	H044300
WCC Citation:	W.C.A.B. No. ADJ6839277

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WCAB (Jose Echeverria)		01/22/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JOSE C. ECHEVERRIA, Respondents. A114505 (WCAB No. SRO 131702) The State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) petitions for review (Labor Code § 5952)*fn1* of the decision after reconsideration of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) affirming an award to respondent, Jose C. Echeverria. State Fund is the insurer for Echeverria's employer, Hiatt Logging. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and JOSE C. ECHEVERRIA, Respondents. For Petitioner State Compensation Insurance Fund Robert W. Daneri, Chief Counsel Suzanne Ah-Tye, Assistant Chief Counsel Don E. Clark, Senior Appellate Counsel For Respondent Workers' Compensation Appeals Board No appearance for Respondent For Respondent Jose C. Echeverria FERCHLAND LAW OFFICE William T. Ferchland, Esq.
Note:	The court agreed to publish an opinion issued on Jan. 5 at the request of State Fund.
Citation:	146 Cal. App. 4th 1311
WCC Citation:	WCC 32052007 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WCAB (Romero)		05/24/2011
Summary:	STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and VINCENTE ROMERO, Respondents. State Compensation Insurance Fund, Suzanne Ah-Tye, Chief Counsel, Patricia Brown, Deputy Chief Counsel, and Don E. Clark, Senior Appellate Counsel, for Petitioner State Compensation Insurance Fund. State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) petitioned for a writ of review of an opinion and order of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denying reconsideration of the findings of fact and award of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), who had declined to reopen and set aside the parties' stipulation that Vicente Romero had suffered an industrial injury but did reopen and increase the stipulated award of 35 percent permanent disability to 100 percent. State Fund was Four Winds' workers' compensation insurance carrier. State Fund asserted section 5803 provided the WCAB with continuing jurisdiction to reduce or rescind the original award for good cause.
Note:	A petition to reduce disability filed more than five years after the date of injury was untimely, but a workers' compensation judge also erred by increasing an applicant's award, the 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled in an unpublished decision.
Citation:	B224825
WCC Citation:	WCC 37652011 CA

Case Name:	State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WCAB (SANDHAGEN)		11/14/2006
Summary:	CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and BRICE SANDHAGEN, Respondents. C048668 (WCAB No. RDG0115958) BRICE SANDHAGEN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Respondents. Robert W. Daneri, Suzanne Ah-Tye, and Don E. Clark for petitioner and respondent State Compensation Insurance Fund. The employer's insurer, State Compensation Insurance Fund (Fund), disagrees and asserts that only monetary penalties can be imposed for its tardiness; it retains the right to deny the treatment request under the UR process and may pursue remedies under the dispute resolution procedures set forth in section 4062. Fund also asserts the WCAB may impose penalties under section 5814 if an employer delays completion of the UR process.
Note:	The WCAB acted within its authority in prohibiting the use of a report generated by an untimely utilization review process in subsequent proceedings challenging the treatment decision.
Citation:	144 Cal. App. 4th 1050
WCC Citation:	WCC 31902006 CA

Case Name:	State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. WCAB (Felts)		05/14/1981
Summary:	STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and FRED FELTS, Respondents. 2 Preliminarily, there exists a question of the timeliness of the petition for review and, thus, our jurisdiction. The Board's order denying reconsideration was filed on June 10, 1980; the petition for review was not filed in this court until December 10, 1980. Here, the petition for review was filed well within 45 days after State Farm first received notice on October 27, 1980, and the petition was therefore timely filed. [2] A brief review of the record indicates that the contention of State Farm is well founded.
Note:	Statutory period for filing petition begins with receipt of notice when service/notice of order is not timely.
Citation:	119 Cal.App.3d 193
WCC Citation:	WCC 27801981 CA

Case Name:	State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. WCAB (Leonard)		12/18/1997
Summary:	STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and PATRICK A. LEONARD, JR. , Respondents. This case presents the question whether Leonard, Jr. , is a covered employee under the workers' compensation law and the State Farm policy. In January 1989, Leonard, Sr. , and his wife purchased a homeowners policy from State Farm. In October 1994, State Farm admitted that Leonard, Sr. , was insured under the policy. Ironically, it is State Farm, not Leonard, Jr. , that asserts the existence of his 'right' not to be subject to the workers' compensation provisions.
Note:	Regardless of relationship, if parties jointly consent to WC coverage, liability will be found against 'employer'.
Citation:	16 Cal.4th 1187
WCC Citation:	WCC 4191997 CA

Case Name:	State Farm Insurance et al. v. WCAB (Pearson)		01/26/2011
Summary:	INTRODUCTION State Farm Insurance Company (State Farm) petitions for writ of review pursuant to Labor Code section 5950*fn1 of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's opinion and order denying reconsideration of a joint supplemental findings and award. Without giving notice to State Farm, counsel for Apparicio and Pearson contacted Dr. Barras and provided her with several medical reports. State Farm also argued that the WCJ's finding regarding reimbursement of Pearson for caregiver services was excessive and unreasonable. State Farm alleged that Apparicio and Pearson scheduled an appointment with Dr. Barras without notifying State Farm, and did not provide State Farm with notice of the time, date, or location of the evaluation. The WCJ also cited Pearson's testimony that State Farm provided services at a $30 hourly rate during 2002 before terminating those services for reasons State Farm never explained.
Note:	The California 2nd District Court of Appeal created new case law Wednesday when it ruled that an applicant improperly had ex parte communication with a medical examiner in a case.
Citation:	B211431
WCC Citation:	WCC 37112011 CA

Case Name:	State of CA Division of Occupational Safety and Health v. Superior Ct. of LA County		04/23/2012
Summary:	STATE OF CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH et al. , Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; MARGARITA ALVAREZ BAUTISTA et al. , Real Parties in Interest. Cal-OSHA has produced those files, along with all the 2009 files, totaling 1,100 files and 100,000 pages of records. Proc. , § 2016. 010) (the Act) applies to traditional mandamus proceedings brought under Code of Civil Procedure section 1085 (Code Civ. Cal-OSHA moved for clarification of these proceedings in the superior court, but the court declined to rule on the motion. Cal-OSHA contends that had the superior court ruled on the motion (and narrowed the proceedings), it would not have granted Bautista's broad discovery request.
Note:	The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health does not need to produce the 2,200 files requested by a litigant.
Citation:	B235419
WCC Citation:	WCC 38892012 CA

Case Name:	State of CA v. IAC (Corsinotti)		10/03/1961
Summary:	STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SUBSEQUENT INJURIES FUND, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION, MARINO CORSINOTTI, an Incompetent Person, etc. , et al. , Respondents. He performed manual tasks with gross clumsiness; he was best suited to activities involving large arm movements performed under supervision. At the time of the accident he attended the Sheltered Workshop of Aid Retarded Children, Inc. (hereinafter designated 'ARC'). The program consisted of the sorting of old newspapers for sale to florists, van and storage companies and other purchasers. The commission ordered that 'State of California, Subsequent Injuries Fund be joined as a party defendant.
Note:	Imbecility of worker didn't foreclose finding that he suffered compensable permanent partial disability.
Citation:	196 Cal.App.2d 10
WCC Citation:	WCC 25481961 CA

Case Name:	State of CA v. Super. Ct.		12/12/1997
Summary:	THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al. , Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; STACI BETH GLOVSKY et al. , Real Parties in Interest. COUNSEL Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Richard J. Rojo, Susan Kawala and D. L. Helfat, Deputy Attorneys General, for Petitioners. Bollington & Roberts, Wayne Hunkins, James D. Roberts, Haight, Brown & Bonesteel, Thomas N. Charchut and Caroline E. Chan for Real Parties in Interest. *- Statement of the Case Petitioners, cross-defendants in the cause below, petitioned this court for a writ of mandate on July 21, 1997. State Compensation Insurance Fund filed a complaint in intervention to recover benefits it paid to Falquez.
Note:	Third-party barred from cross-complaining against employer for indemnity and contribution.
Citation:	60 Cal.App.4th 659
WCC Citation:	WCC 23961997 CA

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