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Case Name:	Sunwest Masonry & Concrete Inc. v. Zamora - unpublished		02/01/2021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Summary:	Filed 6/3/09 Supervalu v. Wexford Underwriting Managers CA2/2 (Editor's note: This decision was originally unpublished, but was granted published status on June 22, 2009.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

Case Name:	Thomas v. Duggins Construction Company		05/25/2006
Summary:	COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA No. D044470 May 25, 2006 WILLIAM THOMAS ET AL. , PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLANTS, v. DUGGINS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. , ET AL. William Thomas and Woodrow C. Taylor (the plaintiffs) sued Duggins Construction Company, Inc. (Duggins) and certain of its employees for injuries they sustained when the scissor lift it sold to their employer collapsed on a construction job site. Thereafter, the court rejected Duggins' arguments that its liability for the plaintiffs' non-economic damages was subject to apportionment in accordance with Proposition 51 and entered a judgment against Duggins for the entirety of the plaintiffs' damages. After Duggins answered, the plaintiffs amended their complaint to name as defendants Duggins employees or agents James Duggins, Russel Roben, Scott Dhalliwal and Doug Calhoun and to add claims for fraud, deceit, willful misconduct and punitive damages. Duggins did not accept either of the offers, which made no reference to the plaintiffs' claims against Duggins' employees or Fremont's claim for reimbursement of worker's compensation payments.
Note:	Intentional tortfeasor is not entitled to apporionment of non-economic damages under Prop 51.
Citation:	139 Cal.App.4th 1105
WCC Citation:	WCC 31592006 CA

Case Name:	Thomas v. Sports Chalet, Inc. (En Banc)		08/17/1977
Summary:	This section created a rehabilitation program which was purely voluntary and could only be initiated by the employer or the insurance carrier. An injured worker had no right to rehabilitation unless one was conferred upon him by his employer or insurance carrier. '(2) To adopt rules and regulations which would expedite and facilitate the identification, notification, and referral of industrially injured employees to rehabilitation services. '(b) The salaries of the personnel of the rehabilitation unit shall be fixed by the State Personnel Board. As a result of the amendment a qualified injured worker is now entitled to vocational rehabilitation as a matter of right.
Note:	Settlement of rehab. prohibited absent good faith dispute re. liability.
Citation:	42 CCC 625
WCC Citation:	WCC 26201977 CA

Case Name:	Thompson v. City of Los Angeles		06/22/2010
Summary:	JUDITH THOMPSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and Respondent. Carmen A. Trutanich, City Attorney, Richard M. Brown, General Counsel for Department of Water and Power, Wendy K. Genz, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendant and Respondent. Appellant concedes the trial court's ruling "essentially foreclosed [her] opportunity to refute the facts submitted in [DWP's] summary judgment motion. "In January 2001, DWP attempted to dock her two hours' pay for reporting sick to the medical department. (See Risam v. County of Los Angeles (2002) 99 Cal. App. 4th 412, 416-417, 421 [findings of civil service hearing officer binding if not challenged by writ of mandamus]; Bowman v. Bd.
Note:	The appellate court noted that a timely FEHA complaint requires an employee to file an administrative charge with the Department of Fair Employment and housing within a year of the last alleged violation. The appeals court examined Thompson's allegations, determined that no acts of retaliation occurred within a year, and affirmed the trial court's decision to grant DWP's motion for summary judgment.
Citation:	B213601
WCC Citation:	WCC 36412010 CA

Case Name:	Thompson v. WCAB		06/21/1994
Summary:	Petitioner Janet Thompson is the widow of the decedent Jack Thompson. In 1987, when Thompson underwent a brief hospitalization for a broken arm, it was discovered that he suffered from hypertension. This resulted in a minor traffic accident and Thompson was taken to a hospital where he died three days later. Dr. John B. O'Brien, in reporting on the death of Thompson to the City's claims supervisor, agreed that the automobile accident played no part in the stroke that killed Thompson. There was no evidence that Mr. Thompson received any advice about his diet, smoking or stress except for salt reduction and, as to that, there is no evidence that Mr. Thompson did not reduce his salt intake.
Note:	Avoidable consequences doctrine does not apply to workers comp. claims.
Citation:	25 Cal.App.4th 1781
WCC Citation:	WCC 24041994 CA

Case Name:	Thrifty Drug Stores Inc. v. WCAB (Kaye)		08/10/1979
Summary:	THRIFTY DRUG STORES, INC. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and RUFINA KAYE, Respondents. On the date of injury, Kaye's earnings were $131. 20 per week, which would result in a temporary disability rate of $81. 02. 1 These figures are computed on the basis of statutory formula derived by application of Labor Code sections 4453 and 4653. fn. Com. , 79 Cal. App. 2d 711, at page 722 [180 P. 2d 972], "By 'Average Earnings' nothing more is meant than earning capacity. Dole involved an injured who was a part-time worker at the time of injury and later obtained steady full-time employment.
Note:	TD rate to be adjusted up for post injury salary increase per collective bargain agreement.
Citation:	95 C.A.3d 937, 44 CCC 809
WCC Citation:	WCC 28881979 CA

Case Name:	Tidgewell v. Gentry, APC et al.		02/29/2012
Summary:	TIDGEWELL v. DAVID E. GENTRY, APC JANET A. TIDGEWELL, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DAVID E. GENTRY, APC et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Plaintiff Janet A. Tidgewell appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of her former attorneys, defendants Hollins Schechter, APC, and David E. Gentry, APC, in this legal malpractice action. When Tidgewell later filed her age discrimination lawsuit, however, Becton asserted the Compromise and Release as an affirmative defense, arguing Tidgewell waived her age discrimination claims by signing the form. In September 2005, Tidgewell, represented by Hollins Schechter, filed a workers' compensation claim against Becton based on her wrist injuries. Tidgewell moved for a new trial based on alleged errors in the trial court's decision granting the two summary judgment motions.
Note:	A grant of summary judgment was upheld in favor of two law firms being sued by a former client for malpractice for having allegedly undermined her age-discrimination action against her employer in settling her workers' compensation claims.
Citation:	G044710
WCC Citation:	WCC 38652012 CA

Case Name:	Tiffany v. Smith		08/31/2012
Summary:	TIFFANY v. SMITH BARBARA TIFFANY, as Executor, etc. , Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID JAMES SMITH et al. , Defendants and Appellants. Smith called Tiffany the day after Tiffany's surgery and asked whether Tiffany would be able to return to work that week. Thereafter, Smith called Tiffany and inquired as to whether he was available to fill in for a few days while Smith was on vacation. The fact that Tiffany could return to work after his injury (and termination) in 2008 was further supported by evidence that Smith asked Tiffany to fill in while Smith was on vacation and considered offering Tiffany part-time employment. Hamwey felt that Smith was discriminating against Tiffany because of the "circumstances that [Tiffany] had with his health event. "
Note:	Sufficient evidence supported a jury's determination that an affluent San Diego doctor had discriminated against a physician with a broken arm by terminating him and then claiming this was done for financial purposes.
Citation:	D058510
WCC Citation:	WCC 39292012 CA

Case Name:	Tiffin v. WCAB (New Idria Mining)		12/15/1972
Summary:	IRA M. TIFFIN, JR. , Petitioner v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, NEW IDRIA MINING & CHEMICAL CO. , PACIFIC MUTUAL LIFE INS. Labor Code section 5500. 5 sets forth the statutory procedure for claims for occupational diseases arising from more than one employment. The compromise and release were approved by the referee two days later at a proceeding in which no testimony was taken. The referee extensively reviewed the numerous assertions made by petitioner and recommended that the petition for reconsideration be denied. We find that the record does not support petitioner's assertion that the procedure set forth in section 5500. 5 is oppressive and causes employee settlements.
Note:	Requirement on WCAB to make proper service may be waived by applicant.
Citation:	38 CCC 53
WCC Citation:	WCC 27831972 CA

Case Name:	Tilbury Constructors, Inc. v. State Compensation Ins. Fund		03/07/2006
Summary:	Tilbury alleged that State Fund failed to take any steps to determine that the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board had deleted the accident-related determination in the citation issued against Tilbury. Tilbury alleges that State Fund has sought to obtain a credit against its obligations to pay Alfrey's benefits based on the $1. 2 million settlement. In that application for credit, State Fund has taken the position that there was no finding that Tilbury had any fault in the accident. Tilbury further alleges that State Fund failed to provide it with documentation of its subrogation handling for three months after Tilbury's request. *fn2 First, and most importantly, State Fund has not denied Tilbury any benefits due to Tilbury under the insurance policy.
Note:	Insurer's decision not to pursue its subrogation rights does not constitute a breach of contract or a breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing.
Citation:	137 Cal. App. 4th 466
WCC Citation:	WCC 31462006 CA

Case Name:	Tilley v. CZ Master Ass'n		07/26/2005
Summary:	Tilley obtained worker's compensation benefits from BonaFide on account of his injuries, and sued CZ, along with several other individuals and entities he alleged were responsible for the incident. 4 He resolved his claims against all named defendants other than CZ. In a word, CZ Master Association originally retained BonaFide to man the gates and provide courtesy patrols, not perform law enforcement functions. "IV In addition to determining CZ had no liability to Tilley under the peculiar risk doctrine, we also conclude CZ owed Tilley no independent duty to restrict the parties thrown by its homeowners, or to control the number of non-residents allowed to attend those parties. While Tilley argues that CZ could have regulated parties through use of the CC&R provision prohibiting nuisance, that would not have been effective. Rather than disputing the evidence, Tilley incorrectly asserts the evidence "pre-date[s] the 1997 and 1998 assaults on Mr. Tilley at the [S. ] residence. "
Note:	Party not liable for injuries of independent contractor if its authority does not affirmatively contribute to the injuries.
Citation:	131 Cal.App.4th 464
WCC Citation:	WCC 31102005 CA