Login


Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?

Case Law Library



 
Case Name: Dept. of Corrections v. WCAB 02/01/1979
Summary: The California Department of Corrections petitions for review of a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (hereafter WCAB) awarding death benefits to respondent Deanna Antrim. This court must decide whether the WCAB had the authority to award death benefits under Labor Code section 4701 et seq. Further, the WCAB has been granted broad powers in Labor Code section 4704 to reassign or reapportion any death benefit 'in a just and equitable manner. 'A second claim for death benefits was filed with the WCAB by the deceased's minor daughter from a prior marriage, Deanna Antrim. Nevertheless, our inquiry does not end here since the Legislature also expressly granted the WCAB discretion in awarding death benefits.
Note: PERS benefits provide additional compensation and are construed liberally due to hazards of public employment.
Citation: 23 Cal.3d 197
WCC Citation: WCC 24661979 CA
 
 
Case Name: Dept. of Corrections v. WCAB 02/01/1979
Summary: The California Department of Corrections petitions for review of a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (hereafter WCAB) awarding death benefits to respondent Deanna Antrim. This court must decide whether the WCAB had the authority to award death benefits under Labor Code section 4701 et seq. Further, the WCAB has been granted broad powers in Labor Code section 4704 to reassign or reapportion any death benefit 'in a just and equitable manner. 'A second claim for death benefits was filed with the WCAB by the deceased's minor daughter from a prior marriage, Deanna Antrim. Nevertheless, our inquiry does not end here since the Legislature also expressly granted the WCAB discretion in awarding death benefits.
Note: Death benefits may be awarded to dependents otherwise denied if
Citation: 23 Cal.3d 197, 44 CCC 114
WCC Citation: WCC 3911979 CA
 
 
Case Name: Dept. of Education v. WCAB (Gill) 03/16/1993
Summary: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, DIVISION OF STATE SPECIAL SCHOOLS, CALIFORNIA SCHOOL FOR THE DEAF, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and THELMA SWAIN GILL, Respondents. 4 work, expert vocational testimony that applicant was not feasible for vocational rehabilitation pursuant to LeBoeuf v. Workers' Comp. On November 5, 1991, the WCJ submitted to the Board his report on petition for reconsideration, recommending that the petition be denied. The Fuentes approach is used where apportionment is justified by the evidence, the Wilkinson one where it is not. Thus, when the WCAB in Harold found that Harold's 1971 injury and 1973 injury became permanent and stationary at the same time the WCAB was still properly exercising its continuing jurisdiction over the 1971 injury.
Note: Method of converting PD rating to a number of weeks of workers' comp.
Citation: 14 Cal.App.4th 1348
WCC Citation: WCC 25071993 CA
 
 
Case Name: Dept. of Highway Patrol v. WCAB 04/18/1995
Summary: DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, Petitioner, v. WORKERS'COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, SUSAN R. BENSON, as Executor, etc. , et al. , Respondents. He had been employed for 25 years as a traffic officer, from September 1954, until his retirement on September 9, 1979, by defendant Department of the California Highway Patrol, insured by the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF). Dr. Goldfarb expressed the opinion that Sills's employment with the highway patrol had been very stressful and had aggravated and accelerated Sills's heart conditions. There was slight improvement, and home care was then provided by licensed vocational nurses and by his fianc'e, Kathryn Compton. 2 Proceedings were held at the Board concerning Sills's workers' compensation claim; benefits accrued pursuant to that claim survived his death.
Note: WCJ erred by using last date of work for dependency status of children rather than date of injury.
Citation: 33 Cal.App.4th 1828, 60 CCC 308
WCC Citation: WCC 25311995 CA
 
 
Case Name: Dept. of Indus. Rel. v. WCAB (Tessler) 06/14/1979
Summary: DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, JEREMY SHANNON TESSLER et al. , Respondents. Younger and George Deukmejian, Attorneys General, Robert L. Bergman, Assistant Attorney General, and B. Franklin Walker, Deputy Attorney General, for Petitioner. Tessler had resided with decedent for approximately three to four months at the time of his death. * California Administrative Code, title 8, section 10870, relating to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's procedures, provides: 'Approval of Compromise and Release. The petition of respondent State Compensation Insurance Fund for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied August 8, 1979.
Note: Balance of death benefit payable to state cannot be avoided by C&R.
Citation: 94 Cal.App.3d 721, 44 CCC 591
WCC Citation: WCC 25981979 CA
 
 
Case Name: Derrick v. WCAB 09/23/1984
Summary: DEBORAH FAITH DERRICK, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondents. After initial emergency hospital care, applicant was treated by several physicians, including one who referred her to Theodore Gray, D. C. , in February 1981 for chiropractic treatment. Dr. Jones submitted his first report to the Department in May 1981 and regularly submitted reports thereafter through March 1982. The Department paid Dr. Jones for applicant's treatment for a period in 1981 before terminating payments. The Department withdrew the issue of the lien and self-procured treatment and agreed, before decision, to satisfy the lien of Dr. Jones.
Note: Change of doctor issue not properly before WCAB because 4603 procedure not followed.
Citation: 159 Cal.App.3D 451, 49 CCC 621
WCC Citation: WCC 24341984 CA
 
 
Case Name: Diamond International Corp. v. WCAB 07/30/1984
Summary: Diamond International Corporation, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California, Kenton Wills, Respondents. COUNSEL: For respondent employee--Leep, Asbill, & Tescher, by M. K. Tescher, Jr. OPINION BY: Puglia, P. J. OPINION: I Petitioner Diamond International Corporation (Diamond) seeks review of an order of respondent Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) denying reconsideration. The conference was called at the request of Wills' attorney after Diamond filed a 'request for closure. 'At the time of the conference, Andreasen told Skamser that he did not have any information about Wills' employment and seniority status with Diamond. Diamond advances two more arguments which require only brief consideration. D Our attention is directed to certain orders entered in Edith Whitley v. Diamond International, WCAB No. 80 FRE 43947.
Note: Amendments made to conform pleading to proof allowed at any time if opposing party would not be surprised by evidence.
Citation: 49 CCC 592
WCC Citation: WCC 27751984 CA
 
 
Case Name: Diaz v. Carcamo 06/23/2011
Summary: DIAZ v. CARCAMO DAWN RENAE DIAZ, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE CARCAMO et al. , Defendants and Appellants. But another driver, who was the only nonparty witness to the collision between Carcamo and Tagliaferri, testified that Carcamo had not accelerated. The jury found that defendants Tagliaferri and Carcamo had driven negligently, that defendant Sugar Transport had been negligent in hiring and retaining Carcamo as a driver, and that the retention was a cause of plaintiff's injuries. Accordingly, had the trial court not made the errors noted above, it is reasonably probable that the jury would have reached a result more favorable to both Carcamo and Sugar Transport on the question of whether Carcamo drove negligently. Second, both Carcamo and the only nonparty witness to the accident testified that Tagliaferri pulled into Carcamo's lane without signaling, and that Carcamo never changed speed.
Note: The Supreme Court of California clarified what type of claims a plaintiff may pursue when that plaintiff has been injured by someone driving a car in the course of employment.
Citation: S181627
WCC Citation: WCC 37772011 CA
 
 
Case Name: Diaz v. S & R Farm Labor Contractor, Inc. 05/23/2018
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 .             MAURA CABRERA DIAZ et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             S & R FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. .             D073115 .             (Super. .             Horton, Oberrecht, Kirkpatrick & Martha, Kimberly S. Oberrecht for Defendant and Respondent. BACKGROUND .           Decedent worked with multiple farm labor contracting companies, which hire employees to pick fruit in fields. .           WE CONCUR: .           HALLER, J.
Note: A California appellate court ruled that an employer that loaned a supervisory employee to another company could not be held vicariously liable for the electrocution of an agricultural worker who was following the supervisor’s instructions to pick fruit from a tree near a live power line.
Citation: D073115
WCC Citation: Super. Ct. No. RIC1209850
 
 
Case Name: Diaz v. West Coast Laboratories, Inc. 10/15/2007
Summary: IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN MARIA DIAZ, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WEST COAST LABORATORIES, INC. , et. Maria Diaz sued West Coast Laboratories ("WCL") and Charles Shad for disability discrimination and wrongful termination. WCL allegedly fired Diaz for improperly weighing capsules and misrepresenting her time; however, Diaz claims that WCL concocted this reason to fire her when she continued to require medical attention and accommodations for her injury. According to Diaz, Shad repeatedly pressured her to sign the Receipt and Acknowledgment form included within the employee handbook as a condition of her continued employment. On January 26, Diaz turned in a signed copy of the Receipt and Acknowledgment form.
Note: [Unpublished] Because the contract at issue has both procedurally and substantively unconscionable elements, the trial court did not err in denying the motion to compel arbitration.
Citation: B195232, BC356498
WCC Citation: WCC 32682007 CA
 
73 Results Page 4 of 8