Case Name:	Tipler v. City of Palmdale		03/03/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO ELGIN TIPLER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CITY OF PALMDALE, Defendant and Respondent. Appellant Elgin Tipler sued respondent City of Palmdale (the City), alleging causes of action related to his departure from employment with the City. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY The City's city manager sent Tipler a letter dated August 5, 2002, notifying him that his employment with the City was terminated effective immediately. The City demurred to the complaint on the ground, inter alia, that Tipler was required, but failed, to allege that he had filed the statutorily required government claim (see § 905) with the City. The City again demurred to the first amended complaint on the ground that Tipler had failed to allege compliance with the requirement that he file a government claim with the City.
Note:	A worker failed to show that his open claim tolled the statute of limitations for his future tort action.
Citation:	B205862
WCC Citation:	WCC 35022009 CA

Case Name:	Tomlin v. WCAB		05/16/2008
Summary:	We granted Officer Tomlin's petition for a writ of review, and we now annul the WCAB's decision denying Officer Tomlin benefits. In addition, Officer Tomlin is an instructor in defense tactics, both for SWAT and for other BHPD police officers. Officer Tomlin otherwise maintains his physical fitness by running, bicycle riding, and weight lifting with other SWAT team members outside of work. The injury required surgery and kept Officer Tomlin out of work until March 16, 2006, when he was able to resume work with modified duties. The issue is not whether Officer Tomlin enjoyed running, or whether Officer Tomlin would be covered by workers' compensation if he had been injured while running solely for pleasure.
Note:	Claimant was required by his employer to maintain physical fitness and pass annual, mandatory physical fitness tests. He was injured when he slipped on a sidewalk while on a three-mile training run for his employer-mandated physical fitness test. Under the facts of this case, claimant's injury is compensable pursuant to section 3600, subdivision (a)(9).
Citation:	B199429
WCC Citation:	WCC 33612008 CA

Case Name:	Toohey v. WCAB		05/04/1973
Summary:	No. 40762 May 4, 1973 THOMAS R. TOOHEY, SR. , PETITIONER, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND PABST BREWING COMPANY, RESPONDENTS Brundage & Roseman and Harvey Reichard for Petitioner. On the date of his injury, petitioner was employed by the Pabst Brewing Company. He prepared the bulletin which stated: "Any employee leaving his job during working hours must obtain permission from his supervisor. The consideration that apparently concerned the board is that Toohey left the premises and incurred a type of risk that was not inherent in his work as a bottler. In the present case, the evidence is that the acts of Toohey, although not encouraged, would be tolerated.
Note:	Because act of leaving for lunch was tolerated, injury while off premises is compensable.
Citation:	32 Cal. App. 3d 98
WCC Citation:	WCC 30551973 CA

Case Name:	Torres vs. Parkhouse Tire Service		08/30/2001
Summary:	MANUEL TORRES et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. PARKHOUSE TIRE SERVICE, INC. , et al. , Defendants and Respondents. Manuel Torres worked for Parkhouse Tire Service, Inc. (Parkhouse), repairing and installing tires. Roy Naas, a sales representative for Parkhouse, approached Torres from behind while he was on his knees working on a tire. 2 Suffering a back injury, Torres did not return to work for Parkhouse. Torres and his wife (plaintiffs) sued Parkhouse and Naas seeking damages for personal injury and loss of consortium.
Note:	In civil action against another employee, injured worker must prove intent to injure.
Citation:	26 Cal.4th 995
WCC Citation:	WCC 28202001 CA

Case Name:	Torretta v. Naltsas		09/15/2010
Summary:	Plaintiff and appellant John L. Torretta (Torretta) appeals from a judgment entered following the trial court's order granting the motion of summary judgment filed by defendant and respondent Steven Naltsas, M. D. (Naltsas). Torretta was referred to Naltsas by Dr. Rocco Fussello, his primary care physician, for treatment of his psoriasis. From 2005 through 2006, Naltsas tried several medications to treat Torretta's psoriasis, but Torretta continued to suffer psoriasis flare-ups. B. Torretta Injures His Hip at Work On February 14, 2007, Torretta, a finish carpenter, was working for CBS Studios (CBS) in its production shop. Specifically, Naltsas claimed that Torretta was aware of the possible link between his avascular necrosis and the steroid injections given by Naltsas by May 2007, when Torretta saw Dr. Fell.
Note:	A one-year statute of limitations barred a carpenter's suit against his private treating dermatologist, because he waited too long to file the suit after his workers' compensation physicians told him that his corticosteroid injections caused his severe hip condition, the 2nd District Court of Appeal ruled.
Citation:	B219421
WCC Citation:	WCC 36682010 CA

Case Name:	Transactron, Inc. v. WCAB (Spears)		03/18/1977
Summary:	The women's rest room was located near the end of the passageway extending from the lobby in a work area confined to employees. The door to the rest room was marked, but from the lobby would appear to a person as just another door. The corridor leading to the rest room was private and would not ordinarily be used by uninvited persons. (1960) 25 Cal. Comp. Cases 194, and Howard v. W. C. A. B. (1966) 31 Cal. Comp. Cases 358. Cases 194; Howard v. W. C. A. B. , supra, 31 Cal. Comp. Cases 358; Morgan v. W. C. A. B. (1971) 36 Cal. Comp. Cases 325; Madin v. Industrial Acc.
Note:	The role of employment in an act of violence is inconsequential when it merely provides a place where the assailant can find the victim.
Citation:	68 Cal.App.3d 233
WCC Citation:	WCC 31171977 CA

Case Name:	Transportation Ins. Co. v. WCAB		09/25/1997
Summary:	Transportation Insurance Company, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, State Compensation Insurance Fund, Sharon Avery, Respondents. At that time, TRW was insured by the Transportation Insurance Co. (Transportation). Transportation Insurance Co. and Applicant C&R'd the first injury and Applicant requested vocational rehabilitation services. Transportation contended there was no statutory, regulatory, or case law establishing SCIF's right for reimbursement; therefore, the WCAB had no jurisdiction over the contribution petition. Additionally, Transportation claimed that the WCAB had no jurisdiction because the RU had not approached the issue of contribution.
Note:	WCAB has jurisdiction over contribution, reimbursement disputes between insurers.
Citation:	62 CCC 1469
WCC Citation:	WCC 26381997 CA

Case Name:	Travelers Indemnity Co. v. WCAB		09/27/2007
Summary:	Filed 9/27/07 Travelers Indemnity Co. v. WCAB CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED 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). As we will explain, we agree with petitioner Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois (Travelers) that the 2005 schedule governs. Accordingly, we will annul the WCAB's order granting Bryer's petition for reconsideration and direct the WCAB to reinstate the WCJ's decision. Subdivision (a) of section 4061 provides that "[t]ogether with the last payment of temporary disability indemnity, the employer shall . Thus, we are concerned only with whether Travelers was required to provide Bryer with the section 4061 notice before January 1, 2005. .
Note:	[Unpublished] Because the petitioner was not required to provide the section 4061 notice to injured employee as of January 1, 2005, the 2005 table must be used to determine the extent of the employee's permanent disability, and the WCAB erred in concluding otherwise.
Citation:	C055329
WCC Citation:	WCC 32622007 CA

Case Name:	Travelers Indemnity Co. v. WCAB (Morales)		07/19/2011
Summary:	The Arbitrator however denied Travelers' claim that CIGA's recovery was also barred under the doctrine of Equitable Estoppel. Travelers, which provided workers' compensation to Linear Technology, was joined as a party defendant on June 11, 2009. Mr. Ganio testified that Travelers has been "going paperless," but he was unable to locate the policy in the "electronic warehouse. "In finding CIGA was barred by laches from seeking recovery from Travelers, the Arbitrator found Travelers had established that CIGA had unreasonably delayed joining Travelers, which caused prejudice to Travelers. The Arbitrator concluded that the delay in joining Travelers precluded Travelers from engaging in discovery to resolve issues of liability.
Note:	The California Supreme Court denied review to a panel decision that rejected an insurer's defense to a California Insurance Guarantee Association reimbursement claim.
Citation:	ADJ2141542
WCC Citation:	WCC 37832011 CA

Case Name:	Travelers Ins. Co. v. IAC (Grace)		03/15/1966
Summary:	THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION, ALBERT L. GRACE et al. , Respondents. However, pursuant to the requirements of the Alaska workmen's compensation law, Travelers paid the following: For temporary disability $9,271. 42; for permanent partial disability $4,698; and for medical expenses $8,198. 40, making a total of $22,167. 82. On November 2, 1964, after receipt of the above mentioned benefits, the applicant filed a claim with the Industrial Accident Commission of California against the employer and Travelers. Travelers contended that its policy covered only claims under the Alaska law and submitted a lien claim for the amounts paid out by it. [3] The Travelers policy was filed with the commission and is contained in the record.
Note:	Award annulled b/c policy did not provide coverage in CA.
Citation:	240 Cal.App.2d 804
WCC Citation:	WCC 26281966 CA

Case Name:	Travelers Ins. Co. v. WCAB		12/17/1982
Summary:	TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS et al. , Respondents. Petitioner, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers), is the workers' compensation carrier for Lee's employer. Travelers was not a party to said stipulation, as under Tessler, it is mere stakeholder. Travelers' petition for reconsideration was denied by the WCAB. Thus, Travelers requests that we disagree with the decision of another division of this court.
Note:	Since a person entitled to a dependency death benefit survived, award is annulled.
Citation:	138 Cal.App.3d 244
WCC Citation:	WCC 24621982 CA

Case Name:	Tri-Spur Investments v. SCIF		09/16/1996
Summary:	Dissatisfied with the manner in which SCIF was handling the claim, Tri-Spur retained counsel who demanded that SCIF substitute him as attorney of record for Tri-Spur in the compensation proceeding. The attorney also unsuccessfully sought payment from SCIF of his fees as purported Cumis counsel for Tri-Spur. Thereafter, counsel for Tri-Spur served SCIF with a subpoena for all of SCIF's records and reports pertaining to Mason. In exchange for these promises by SCIF to defend against and pay legitimate claims, Tri-Spur has contractually given SCIF the right to investigate and settle such claims, and has promised to cooperate with and assist SCIF as requested in the investigation, settlement or defense of any claim. Thus, because SCIF has accepted the obligation to pay any benefits awarded [*10] to Mason in the compensation proceeding, Tri-Spur is not in a position of inherent conflict with SCIF.
Note:	Substituting insurer for employer permitted where no conflict of interest.
Citation:	61 CCC 940
WCC Citation:	WCC 24961996 CA

Case Name:	Trimas Corp., et al., v. WCAB (Rendon)		07/30/2010
Summary:	TRIMAS CORPORATION et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and FRANK RENDON, Respondents. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION THE COURT Trimas Corporation (Trimas[ FN*1 ]) petitions for a writ of review from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). BACKGROUND Frank Rendon was assaulted and strangled by a coworker while working as a shipping and receiving clerk for Trimas in Fresno on May 30, 2008. Trimas timely petitioned for reconsideration, which the WCAB denied by opinion on March 22, 2010. The WCJs report and recommendation to the WCAB is also lacking as an exhibit to the petition.
Note:	An employer failed to preserve its utilization review argument for appeal, according to an unpublished decision from California's 5th District Court of Appeal.
Citation:	F060040
WCC Citation:	WCC 36532010 CA

Case Name:	Tristan v. California Dept of Corrections and Rehabilitation		10/29/2012
Summary:	TRISTAN v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION DAVID P. TRISTAN, JR. , Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION et al. , Defendants and Respondents. INTRODUCTION David P. Tristan, Jr. , a parole agent for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (the Department), sued the Department and several of his supervisorsMichael Ayala, A. J. Garcia, and Maritza Rodriguez. According to Tristan, the parolee attempted to evade arrest and assaulted Tristan while attempting to flee. Tristan supported his opposition with a lengthy declaration in which he set forth in detail his numerous grievances against respondents. Tristan also requested that the trial court take judicial notice of various documents, including numerous provisions from the Department's operation manual.
Note:	The California Department of Corrections was entitled to the summary dismissal of a parole agent's claims that his supervisors had discriminated against him after he suffered two work-related knee injuries.
Citation:	D060285
WCC Citation:	WCC 39462012 CA

Case Name:	Tucker v. WCAB		01/07/1975
Summary:	MANTYE TUCKER, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, JOHN MUIR HOSPITAL et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Christian, J. , with Caldecott, P. J. , and Rattigan, J. , concurring. )OPINION CHRISTIAN, J. Petitioner received compensation of $7,250 for an industrial injury pursuant to an award which had been issued on September 14, 1973. On October 19, 1973, petitioner demanded payment of the $14. 02; on November 28, 1973, Argonaut paid the interest. Respondent board has refused to assess a 10 percent penalty for late payment of the $14. 02 interest. Interest should always be computed and paid with the payment of the principal award absent special circumstances.
Note:	Failure of carrier to take administrative measures to compute and pay interest on every award was not to be disregarded as de minimis.
Citation:	44 Cal.App.3d 330
WCC Citation:	WCC 26181975 CA

Case Name:	Tung Tran v. Zhi Qiang Luo		11/15/2011
Summary:	TUNG TRAN v. ZHI QIANG LUO TUNG TRAN, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ZHI QIANG LUO, Defendant and Appellant. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS SIMONS, J. Appellant Zhi Qiang Luo appeals from the trial court's injunctive relief order (Code Civ. Proc. , § 527. 8)*fn1 protecting respondent Tung Tran and Tran's employees from violence and threats of violence by appellant. The petition alleged that, on December 24, 2010, after respondent terminated appellant's employment, appellant threatened to kill respondent and his employees. The trial court issued the TRO and an order to show cause why the requested injunction should not issue.
Note:	A California appellate court affirmed an injunction barring a former employee from making violent threats against his employer, and forcing him to stay away from his former co-workers.
Citation:	A131589
WCC Citation:	WCC 38272011 CA

Case Name:	Tverberg et al. v. Fillner Construction		01/26/2012
Summary:	Ct. No. FCS028210) The trial court granted summary judgment to respondent Fillner Construction, Inc. (Fillner), and dismissed the personal injury action of appellants Jeffrey and Catherine Tverberg. Tverberg had more than 20 years experience in structural steel construction and held a state contractors license under the name of J. T. Constructiona sole proprietorship consisting exclusively of Tverberg. Tverberg alleged causes of action for negligence and premises liability; Catherine Tverberg pled a cause of action for loss of consortium. (Tverberg v. Fillner Construction, Inc. (2011) 193 Cal. App. 4th 1121, review granted July 13, 2011, S192804. )Third, the Tverbergs claim that the affirmative contribution is demonstrated by evidence that Fillner failed to cover the holes after Tverberg twice asked Fillner to do so.
Note:	A self-employed independent contractor can sue a general contractor under a theory of negligent exercise of retained control.
Citation:	A120050
WCC Citation:	WCC 38492012 CA

Case Name:	Tverberg v. Fillner Construction (1st DCA decision)		02/24/2011
Summary:	Fillner contracted with subcontractor Lane Supply, which delegated the work to subcontractor Perry Construction, Inc. (Perry). Tverberg had more than 20 years' experience in structural steel construction and held a state contractor's license under the name of J. T. Constructiona sole proprietorship consisting exclusively of Tverberg. Finding that Fillner had established a complete defense to the Tverbergs' action, the trial court entered judgment for Fillner in November 2007. Third, the Tverbergs claim that the affirmative contribution is demonstrated by evidence that Fillner failed to cover the holes after Tverberg twice asked Fillner to do so. (Tverberg v. Fillner Construction, Inc. (2010) 49 Cal. 4th 518 (Tverberg). )
Note:	Eight months after the California Supreme Court told a self-employed independent contractor that he could not sue a general contractor on a theory of vicarious liability, the 1st District Court of Appeal has now allowed Jeffrey Tverberg to sue the same general contractor under a theory of direct liability.
Citation:	A120050-2
WCC Citation:	WCC 37202011 CA

Case Name:	Tverberg v. Fillner Construction (CA Supreme Court)		06/28/2010
Summary:	JEFFREY TVERBERG et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. FILLNER CONSTRUCTION, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. To do that work, Fillner hired subcontractor Lane Supply, which delegated the work to subcontractor Perry Construction Company, which then hired plaintiff independent contractor Jeffrey Tverberg as foreman of Perry's two-man canopy-construction crew. Tverberg, who had more than 20 years' experience in structural steel construction, held a state contractor's license under the name J. T. Construction, a sole proprietorship consisting exclusively of Tverberg. Although subcontractor Perry paid Tverberg on an hourly basis, it is undisputed that Tverberg was not Perry's employee but an independent contractor. Tverberg then sued general contractor Fillner and subcontractor Perry, which had hired Tverberg, seeking damages for physical and mental injuries and lost income under theories of negligence and premises liability.
Note:	A self-employed independent contractor cannot sue a general contractor for work-related injuries under a theory of vicarious liability.
Citation:	S169753
WCC Citation:	WCC 36442010 CA

Case Name:	Twen. Cent.-Fox Film Corp. v. WCAB		04/11/1983
Summary:	TWENTIETH CENTURY-FOX FILM CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and KEVIN CONWAY, Respondents. The applicant was then involved in a minor traffic accident, and on the same day his screenplay was rejected by the story department. Dr. Alfred Bloch, a psychiatrist reporting on behalf of the applicant, diagnosed the applicant's psychiatric condition as: '1. Conway provides an extremely complex history of events in the course of his employment at 20th Century Fox Studios. [141 Cal. App. 3d 782] 'Apparently, Mr. Conway worked fairly consistently for Ralphs Supermarkets prior to employment in the film industry.
Note:	Judge erred by not discussing basis of opinion as to an employee's psychiatric injury.
Citation:	141 Cal.App.3d 778
WCC Citation:	WCC 24831983 CA

Case Name:	Tyler v. WCAB		07/15/1997
Summary:	BERNARD TYLER, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Respondents. OPINION HASTINGS, Acting P. J. - Facts Bernard Tyler (applicant) was employed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (employer) in April 1988 in its Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania office. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB or Board) adopted the WCJ's reasons for his decision in a two-page order denying reconsideration. Discussion Labor Code sections 5701 and 5906 authorize the WCJ and WCAB to obtain additional evidence, including medical, at any time during the proceedings. A WCAB decision reported in the California Workers' Compensation Reporter is a properly citable authority, especially as an indication of contemporaneous interpretation and application of workers' compensation laws.
Note:	WCJ cannot appoint an IME; Board empowered to obtain additional evidence to determine benefits.
Citation:	56 Cal.App.4th 389
WCC Citation:	WCC 3771997 CA

Case Name:	U.S. Auto Stores v. WCAB		03/26/1971
Summary:	U. S. AUTO STORES et al. , Petitioners, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and HERMAN FREDERICK BRENNER, Respondents. OPINION PETERS, J. Petitioners U. S. Auto Stores and American Hardware Mutual Insurance Company claim that the award of permanent disability of the Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board is not supported by substantial evidence and that the award is not supported by the findings. Dr. Wood estimated [4 Cal. 3d 472] applicant's permanent disability 'at no greater than 15 to 20% at the present time. . . . ' fn. [¶] The above-described factors result in a 77 1/2% reduction in his ability to compete in the open labor market. 'Com. , 30 Cal. Comp. Cases 336, relied upon by U. S. Auto Stores, are not in point.
Note:	Referee's failure to make specific findings of disabling extent and effect of factors was waived by failure to raise in petition.
Citation:	4 Cal.3d 469
WCC Citation:	WCC 26711971 CA

Case Name:	Universal City Studios, Inc., v. WCAB		12/12/1979
Summary:	UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and BERNICE LEWIS, Respondents. Her employer, petitioner Universal City Studios, Inc. (Universal), petitioned for writ of review before this court. 3 At the conclusion of the cross-examination of Dr. Rolston and the rating specialist, Universal moved that Dr. Rolston's report and the rating be stricken. Specifically, Universal contended that Dr. Rolston did not use the term 'semi-sedentary work' within the meaning as stated in the Rating Schedule. Universal also asserted that Dr. Rolston's description of Lewis' subjective complaints and physical ability were inconsistent with a restriction of semisedentary work.
Note:	Worker may receive 100% PD although able to return to work at prior wages; judge allowing rater to decide among evidentiary facts is improper.
Citation:	99 Cal.App.3d 647
WCC Citation:	WCC 25191979 CA

Case Name:	Unruh vs. Truck Ins. Exchange		07/21/1972
Summary:	ORPHA UNRUH, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE et al. , Defendants and Respondents In Bank. The second amended complaint (hereinafter for convenience referred to as "complaint") names as defendants Truck Insurance Exchange (Truck), Farmers Insurance Group (Farmers), William Baker and Lawrence Marino fn. On March 31, 1960, plaintiff injured her back while working for an employer insured under the workmen's compensation laws by defendant Truck. Exchange (1958) 157 Cal. App. 2d 759 [321 P. 2d 831] (negligence and conspiracy in providing medical treatment); State Comp. It is convenient to note at this point that this issue before us pertains only to defendant Truck, the sole compensation carrier of plaintiff's employer.
Note:	WCAB has exclusive jurisdiction on negligent acts of carrier, but not intentional; Employer may 'set off' award against civil damages.
Citation:	7 Cal.3d 616
WCC Citation:	WCC 28611972 CA

Case Name:	Uranga v. Continental Casualty Co.		03/24/2009
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX MATTSON URANGA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO. , Defendant and Respondent. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Appellant's employer, National Ready Mix, had two insurance policies; one for commercial automobile coverage and another for workers' compensation benefits. CNA, through respondent Continental Casualty Company, provided uninsured and underinsured motorist benefits. Appellant filed a claim against the driver who caused the collision and a claim for workers' compensation benefits. Appellant's workers' compensation claim against National Ready Mix was resolved by stipulation on November 30, 2004, in the amount of $168,687. 93.
Note:	[Unpublished] A carrier did not breach the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by making low settlement offers during the arbitration process.
Citation:	B205995
WCC Citation:	WCC 35062009 CA

Case Name:	Uwaydah v. Roth		05/18/2010
Summary:	On December 20, 2007, Weiss sent Roth a letter about Frost's investigation, welcoming Roth's direct inquiries regarding Uwaydah if there was a legitimate reason. Uwaydah heard nothing more from Roth until January 7, 2009, when, by chance, he learned Roth had sent two subpoenas, dated September 5, 2008 (attached as exhibits to the complaint), to Jindy Bal, counsel for Tustin Hospital (one of the locations where Uwaydah practices). *fn3 Uwaydah is informed and believes Roth continues to contact hospitals and other third parties "fishing" for information to deny Uwaydah's claims. On the basis of these allegations, Uwaydah (and Frontline, included in our further references to Uwaydah) sued Roth for abuse of process. While Uwaydah misrepresents some of the contentfor example, Roth said, he made no "negative statements" about Uwaydah, the communications complained of were communications in the course of this investigation.
Note:	[Unpublished] Plaintiff failed to meet his burden to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on his abuse of process claim, and defendant's motion was properly granted.
Citation:	B217606
WCC Citation:	WCC 36252010 CA

Case Name:	Vacanti, Inc. v. SCIF		01/04/2001
Summary:	After plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, defendants filed another demurrer, again alleging that workers' compensation exclusivity bars plaintiffs' claims. After plaintiffs amended their complaint a third time, the second judge sustained the demurrer solely on exclusivity grounds. The employee may also obtain compensation for medical-legal evaluations necessary to establish his or her entitlement to benefits. Ordinarily, the insurer must pay all medical or medical-legal bills of an injured employee within 60 days of receiving the bill. Indeed, the unabated flow of published decisions clarifying the scope of workers' compensation exclusivity suggests considerable confusion as well as innovative lawyering.
Note:	Exclusive Remedy Doctrine extends to claims for acts/motives typified in the compensation bargain (i.e. late payment).
Citation:	24 Cal 4th 800
WCC Citation:	WCC 26302001 CA

Case Name:	Vaira v. WCAB (California Travel and Tourism Commission)		12/03/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT LOIS VAIRA, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and CALIFORNIA TRAVEL AND TOURISM COMMISSION et al. , Respondents. Petitioner contends the WCAB erred in apportioning a share of her disability to her age and a pre-existing condition of osteoporosis. Five months earlier, on August 14, 2002, petitioner had suffered another work-related injury and filed a separate workers' compensation claim (WCAB No. SAC0323237). We agree with the WCAB that the parties' stipulation did not preclude a reduction in the overall disability for the award in WCAB No. SAC0323237. DISPOSITION The decision of the WCAB is annulled and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed in this opinion.
Note:	[Unpublished] Any apportionment to age, per se, runs afoul of state antidiscrimination law.
Citation:	C054948
WCC Citation:	WCC 32852007 CA

Case Name:	Valadez v. WCAB		10/15/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HORACIO MONTOYA VALADEZ, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and BONANZA FARMS, Respondents. -ooOoo- *Before A. P. J. , Levy, J. , Cornell, J. , and Gomes, J. Horacio Montoya Valadez (Montoya) petitions for a writ of review claiming the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) acted without or in excess of its powers by issuing an unreasonable decision based upon unsettled, wrongly decided law and unsupported findings of fact. *fn3 Montoya petitioned the WCAB for reconsideration contending the WCAB wrongly decided Pendergrass and Baglione and that the WCJ here should have adopted a permanent disability rating under the 1997 PDRS. On June 21, 2007, the WCAB denied reconsideration by adopting and incorporating the WCJ's report and recommendation. The WCAB issued earlier opinions in both Pendergrass and Baglione, but before they became final, a new majority resulting from a change in WCAB membership reconsidered the matters and reversed the prior decisions.
Note:	[Unpublished] The Legislature expressly established that the 2005 PDRS applies prospectively at the time of the WCAB's determination unless one of three specific exceptions applies.
Citation:	F053290, VNO0500624
WCC Citation:	WCC 32672007 CA

Case Name:	Valdez v. Clarendon National Insurance Co.		12/31/1969
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO .             ALEJANDRO VALDEZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, .             v. .             CLARENDON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al. , Defendants and Respondents. .             B278542 .             (Los Angeles County Super. .             Tressler, Mary E. McPherson and Ryan B. Luther for Defendants and Respondents Clarendon National Insurance Company, QBE Americas, Inc. , and QBE First Insurance Agency, Inc, .             The Morrison Law Group, Edward F. Morrison, Jr. and Larry A. Schwartz for Defendants and Respondents T&T Improvements, Inc. and Tim Tilton. .           Plaintiff and appellant Alejandro Valdez (plaintiff) appeals from the judgment dismissing his action against defendants and respondents Clarendon National Insurance Company (Clarendon), QBE Americas, Inc. , QBE First Insurance Agency, Inc. , 1 T&T Improvements, Inc. (T&T), and Tim Tilton (Tilton) (collectively, defendants)2 after the trial court sustained, without leave to amend, defendants’ demurrers to all of the causes action asserted against them. .           J. CHAVEZ .           We concur: .           Acting P. J. ASHMANN-GERST .           J.
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that an injured worker could not proceed with his civil action against his employer and its insurance carrier for alleged misconduct during the negotiations to settle his comp claim because the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter.
Citation:	B278542
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC606254

Case Name:	Valdez v. Himmelfarb		11/20/2006
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN No. B184281 November 20, 2006 ELIAS VALDEZ, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. DOUGLAS HIMMELFARB ET AL. , DEFENDANTS AND RESPONDENTS. Valdez filed a timely appeal from the judgment for defendants but no appeal was filed on behalf of Valdez or his attorneys from the sanction order. In May 2003 Valdez filed the present action for personal injury, unfair competition and declaratory relief alleging the Mission Club was a business operated by defendant Himmelfarb and others who "intentionally and without good cause . *fn6 The court reasoned defendants "conclusively established" Valdez knew no later than December 2001 defendants did not have workers' compensation insurance. But even if this was the date on which Valdez first discovered Himmelfarb was his uninsured employer the complaint was filed more than a year after this discovery.
Note:	Actions under Labor Code section 3706 are covered by the three-year statute of limitations in the Code of Civil Procedure.
Citation:	144 Cal. App. 4th 1261
WCC Citation:	WCC 31912006 CA

Case Name:	Valdez v. WCAB		05/29/2012
Summary:	VALDEZ v. WCAB ELAYNE VALDEZ, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and WAREHOUSE DEMO SERVICES et al. Respondents. We therefore annul the decision of the WCAB and remand with directions for further proceedings that are consistent with this opinion. "*fn1 The WCAB found that the WCJ "relied on the non-MPN reports of Dr. Nario for this finding [temporary disability] and award of benefits. "'"*fn2 The WCAB concluded that reports from non-MPN physicians are inadmissible and may not be relied on to award compensation. In its second en banc opinion, the WCAB did not limit itself to holding that section 4616. 6 made Dr. Nario's report inadmissible.
Note:	California's Labor Code does not prohibit the admission of medical reports from doctors who are not a part of an employer's properly noticed and valid medical provider network.
Citation:	B237147
WCC Citation:	WCC 39002012 CA

Case Name:	Valdivia v. Del Monte Foods		12/09/2010
Summary:	ELIZABETH VALDIVIA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DEL MONTE FOODS, INC. et al. , Defendants and Respondents. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS OPINION WISEMAN, Acting P. J. Elizabeth Valdivia, an employee of Del Monte Foods, Inc. , sued Del Monte and its plant manager, Jim Fullmer, for sexual harassment. Valdivia alleged five causes of action against Fullmer and Del Monte: sexual harassment; intentional infliction of emotional distress; negligent infliction of emotional distress; sexual battery; and negligent failure to supervise and train. If found that negligence by Del Monte in hiring or supervising Fullmer was not a factor in causing harm to Valdivia. Finally, it found that Valdivia did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that Del Monte engaged in conduct against her with malice, oppression, or fraud.
Note:	A trial judge's warning that he might have to declare a mistrial in a worker's civil suit in order to hear other cases did not constitute a prejudicial error.
Citation:	F056866
WCC Citation:	WCC 36902010 CA

Case Name:	Valero v. Board of Retirement of Tulare County Employees' Retirement Assoc.		05/01/2012
Summary:	VALERO v. BOARD OF RETIREMENT OF TULARE COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION JOE VALERO, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF RETIREMENT OF TULARE COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Respondent. CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION OPINION FRANSON, J. Respondent Board of Retirement of Tulare County Employees' Retirement Association (the Board) denied the application of appellant Joe Valero for a service-connected disability retirement. Valero was hired as an "Office Assistant II" by the County of Tulare Health and Human Services Agency (the County) in April of 1999. On July 9, 2008, the Board determined that Valero failed to meet his burden of establishing service connection, and instead granted Valero a non-service-connected disability retirement. (Dickey v. Retirement Board (1976) 16 Cal. 3d 745; County of Alameda v. Board of Retirement (1988) 46 Cal. 3d 902. )
Note:	A county office worker with a disabling psychiatric condition failed to prove his panic disorder was service-connected.
Citation:	F062601
WCC Citation:	WCC 38912012 CA

Case Name:	Van Voorhis vs. WCAB (Bethlehem Steel Corp.)		02/04/1974
Summary:	HERBERT D. VAN VOORHIS, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION, Respondents (Opinion by Sims, Acting P. J. , with Elkington, J. , and Bray, J. , concurring. )3 and return having made, and the matter having been regularly submitted, it is concluded that the board erred. Its decision and award must therefore be vacated, and the matter returned for reinstatement of the award granted by the referee. No mention was made of his hearing loss, and he never lost any time or wages, or received medical treatment for that complaint. In September 1971, he was told that his hearing loss might have been due to his employment.
Note:	Compensation must be measured by the applicant's earning capacity as it existed at the time he incurred his compensable disability.
Citation:	37 CA3d 81
WCC Citation:	WCC 30291974 CA

Case Name:	Vanderheiden v. City of Alameda		06/02/2009
Summary:	The City claims Vanderheiden called a station meeting in which he put other employees "on notice" that they should leave him alone. The City insisted that Vanderheiden receive psychological counseling through the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) before he could return to work. The City moved for summary judgment on grounds that (1) Vanderheiden could not prove the City "regarded him" as mentally disabled under the FEHA; (2) the City had engaged in good faith in any interactive process required of it; (3) the City had offered Vanderheiden a reasonable accommodation; and (4) Vanderheiden could not perform the essential duties of a firefighter. Although the court found it "likely" the City did regard Vanderheiden as mentally disabled, it granted summary judgment to the City because Vanderheiden had presented insufficient evidence that he could perform the essential functions of the job. Dr. Everstine originally produced no records underlying her opinion to either the City or Vanderheiden, as Vanderheiden had refused to sign a release.
Note:	[Unpublished] There are genuine issues of fact regarding plaintiff's psychological health and his ability to perform his job.
Citation:	A120169
WCC Citation:	WCC 35302009 CA

Case Name:	Vargas v. WCAB		10/15/1986
Summary:	William Vargas, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board of the State of California; Tom and Bob's Auto; and Great American Insurance Company, Respondents. The parties filed stipulations with request for award, which was approved by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (board). The Tow Company also filed a petition to dismiss the petition to reopen based on the same facts. On April 12, WCJ Davidson filed an order setting aside the dismissals in all three of applicant's cases based upon the amended objection. Thus, unless Vargas timely objected to the dismissal order or filed a petition for reconsideration, the dismissal order was a final adjudication of his petition to reopen.
Note:	WCJ has no jurisdiction to permit rescission of order of dismissal absent timely objection.
Citation:	51 CCC 480
WCC Citation:	WCC 27211986 CA

Case Name:	Vargas vs. Atascadero State Hospital		04/11/2006
Summary:	Myrtle Vargas, Applicant v. Atascadero State Hospital, Legally Uninsured, State Compensation Insurance Fund (Adjusting Agent), Defendants W. C. A. B. No. GRO 0016640 WCJ Bruce M. Lang (GRO) WCAB En Banc: Chairman Miller, Commissioners O'Brien, Cuneo, Murray, Brass, Rabine (concurring), Caplane (concurring) Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (en banc) Opinion Filed April 11, 2006 Disposition: Applicant's Petition for Removal is denied. Thus, the recommended rating of 71% was based on the neck and left upper extremity disability. Applicant filed a Declaration of Readiness to Proceed (DOR), and the petition to reopen proceeded to hearing on March 2, 2004. On April 15, the District Office served notice of hearing for cross-examination of the rater set for May 20, 2004. Defendant, State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), then filed a response.
Note:	SB 899 apportionment rules apply to reopened cases seeking increased permanent disability regardless of date of injury.
Citation:	71 CCC 500 (2006)
WCC Citation:	WCC 31552006 CA

Case Name:	Varisco v. Gateway Science and Engineering, Inc.		09/15/2008
Summary:	CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION Appellant Al Varisco sued respondent Gateway Science and Engineering for wrongful termination of employment and similar causes of action, all of which depended on the allegation that he had been Gateway's employee. Gateway moved for summary judgment on the ground that Varisco was not an employee, but an independent contractor. Gateway responded to Varisco's call, and on January 30, 2004, Varisco and Gateway signed a letter agreement in which Varisco agreed to provide "DSA Inspection Services to the Los Angeles Unified School District (Client)" and Gateway agreed to pay him an hourly rate. Gateway moved for summary judgment, contending that Varisco was an independent contractor, not an employee. On appeal, Varisco concedes that the causes of action are viable only if he was an employee, not an independent contractor.
Note:	All the undisputed facts add up to an independent contractor relationship.
Citation:	B200339
WCC Citation:	WCC 34242008 CA

Case Name:	Vasquez v. Del Rio Sanitarium, Inc.		03/05/2012
Summary:	Vasquez resigned her Target job when Del Rio began scheduling Vasquez for weekend work that conflicted with her schedule at Target. However, Maxwell testified at trial that the document was generated after Del Rio received notice that Vasquez filed for unemployment benefits. Gardiner told her to call Vasquez, so she called Vasquez from Del Rio on January 12, 2009. Del Rio did not distribute an employee handbook or other notice to employees stating that Del Rio required medical certification. When Del Rio learned of Vasquez's need for accommodation, Del Rio did not provide her with any paperwork requesting medical certification.
Note:	A nursing assistant was awarded $196,760 in a Fair Employment and Housing claim, based on her former employer's failure to accommodate her medical restrictions during the early stages of her pregnancy.
Citation:	B231327
WCC Citation:	WCC 38662012 CA