Case Name:	DeCelle v. City of Alameda		11/22/1960
Summary:	ROBERT E. DeCELLE, Respondent, v. CITY OF ALAMEDA et al. , Appellants. COUNSEL Frank Annibale, City Attorney, and Ralph Reisner, Assistant City Attorney, for Appellants. * Robert E. DeCelle petitioned for alternative and peremptory writs of mandate directing the city of Alameda to pay him a disability pension pursuant to its Ordinance No. 1079 New Series. Judgment was for petitioner, and from that judgment and the peremptory writ of mandamus entered in accordance therewith, the city of Alameda now appeals. The petition further alleges that by reason of said injury petitioner was permanently disabled from performing his duties as a member of said fire department of the city of Alameda.
Note:	Disability in this section is not as to earning power only, but efficiency in ordinary pursuits of life.
Citation:	186 Cal.App.2d 574, 25 CCC 247
WCC Citation:	WCC 25321960 CA

Case Name:	DeCunha v. IAC		12/14/1964
Summary:	Josephine DeCunha sustained an industrial injury to her leg in May, 1959. The insurance policy specifically excluded sisters-in-law of the employer from coverage. The carrier voluntarily furnished temporary disability benefits and medical treatment for four years. The issue of coverage was not raised in the answer to the application nor the pretrial conference. You are counseled to consult the full case for an accurate citation.
Note:	Voluntary provision of benefits does not estop carrier from denying coverage on relative exclusion.
Citation:	29 CCC 272
WCC Citation:	WCC 3861964 CA

Case Name:	Dedekian v. Central Unified School Dist.		10/24/2007
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT PAULINE DEDEKIAN, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CENTRAL UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant and Appellant. -ooOoo- Defendant Central Unified School District (CUSD) appeals from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff Pauline Dedekian (Dedekian) after a court trial on her claim that CUSD violated the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq. In March 1999, Dedekian became interim principal of Central High School West (Central West). Dedekian became the permanent principal of Central West for the 1999-2000 school year, and continued in that position for the 2000-2001 school year. Powell told Dedekian that "half of [her] school" had been "coming in droves" to complain about her and she created the low morale at the school.
Note:	[Unpublished] Because the issue of the appellant's obligation to engage in the interactive process is primarily a factual one, the reviewing court is without power to substitute its deductions for those of the trial court.
Citation:	F050381 & F050977
WCC Citation:	WCC 32702007 CA

Case Name:	DeFrates v. Clark		11/08/2011
Summary:	DeFrates argues that the trial court erred when it found that Clark was not personally liable for DeFrates' on-the-job injuries, because Clark's actions as the hirer of DeFrates's employer, R. G. Clark Construction, Inc. , did not affirmatively contribute to DeFrates's injuries. He contends that Clark is personally responsible for his (DeFrates's) injuries because Clark, in his capacity as the person who hired DeFrates's employer, R. G. Clark Construction, supplied defective safety equipment to the jobsite. In addition, DeFrates describes Clark as not only the owner of the property, but also as the "representative of the employer R. G. Clark Construction. "DeFrates's catalogue of various activities Clark engaged in on the property does not establish that when Clark gave DeFrates safety instructions he did so as an individual, rather than as DeFrates's employer. Thus, even assuming that Clark gave DeFrates safety instructions in his capacity as the hirer of R. G. Clark Construction, Inc. , he was not liable for DeFrates's injuries because there was no affirmative contribution.
Note:	A construction foreman's sole remedy for his roof injury was workers' compensation.
Citation:	A131222
WCC Citation:	WCC 38222011 CA

Case Name:	Del Rio vs. Quality Hardware, Republic Indemnity		04/20/1993
Summary:	The reasons for the settlement included a dispute over injury AOE/COE and nature and extent of the employee's disability. The Summary of Evidence reflects that the employee, Jose Del Rio, testified that he complained about medical problems related to his employment in 1987 and 1989. On February 5, 1991, Jose Del Rio was examined by Neurologic Orthopedic Associates and a report of that examination was sent to the employee's attorney on February 12, 1991. Lien Claimants' Exhibit III-A is a letter dated February 26, 1991, from Quality Hardware returning the form letter with insurance information. Neither Neurologic Orthopedic Associates nor Bristol Diagnostics timely raised the issue of penalty and interest under Labor Code section 4622.
Note:	Employer not liable for medical-legal costs prior the filing of a claim form or notice or knowledge by the employer of the injury followed by a reasonable time to accept or deny the claim.
Citation:	58 CCC 147 (En Banc)
WCC Citation:	WCC 30601993 CA

Case Name:	Del Taco v. WCAB		04/20/2000
Summary:	Facts and Procedural History Jorge Gutierrrez (worker) was employed at a Del Taco restaurant when he injured his lower back. A week later, Del Taco discovered that he was not legally in the United States and that he had provided Del Taco an invalid social security number. The parties stipulate that if worker had produced a valid social security number, Del Taco would have allowed him to continue his work in a modified capacity. Here, Del Taco provided modified work to worker and after he commenced the modified work, Del Taco terminated the employment because it discovered that he was not legally permitted to work in the United States. Nevertheless, the WCAB required Del Taco to provide worker vocational rehabilitation services, apparently in Mexico, because Del Taco was not legally able to provide modified work in the United States.
Note:	Worker gets TD but not voc. rehab. when can't work because he's illegal immigrant.
Citation:	79 Cal.App.4th 1437, 65 CCC 342
WCC Citation:	WCC 24582000 CA

Case Name:	Delgadillo v. Television Center, Inc.		02/02/2018
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115(a).   IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             LUZ ELENA DELGADILLO et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             TELEVISION CENTER, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. .             B270985 .             (Los Angeles County Super. .             Plaintiffs Luz Elena Delgadillo, Christian Franco, and Valeria Franco (plaintiffs) are the surviving wife and children, respectively, of Salvador Franco (decedent). .           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS .           EDMON, P. J. .           We concur: .           LAVIN, J.
Note:
Citation:	B270985
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC512758

Case Name:	Delgadillo v. United States Liability Ins. Co.		03/29/2017
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 FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR .             ELENA DELGADILLO ET AL. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             UNITED STATES LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL. , Defendants and Respondents. .             A143452 .             (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG13681917) .             Plaintiffs Elena Delgadillo and Jesus Cortes appeal an order of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained the demurrer of defendant United States Liability Insurance Company (USLI) without leave to amend. .             Plaintiffs’ insurance policy (the policy) contained the following exclusions pertinent to this case: “d. .           We concur: .           _________________________ Reardon, J. , Acting P. J. .           _________________________ Streeter, J.   Lopez was also named as a defendant.
Note:
Citation:	A143452
WCC Citation:	Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG13681917

Case Name:	Delgado v. PJH Brands		11/08/2011
Summary:	Brothers Juan and Luis Delgado, and Juan's wife Alma Delgado (collectively plaintiffs) sued PJH Brands (defendant or PJH) for negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium for injuries that Juan and Luis sustained in a gas explosion at work. Quite the opposite: the parties stipulated that PJH was a customer of APP, and it was undisputed that PJH provided bookkeeping services to APP pursuant to contract. Mr. Land reasoned that the decision not to upgrade the tanks must have been made by PJH, because PJH paid APP's bills. APP's shipping and receiving manager, Margarita Siordia, testified that she considered PJH staff to be her "supervisors," because they caused PJH to issue purchase orders for APP to ship products to PJH. Plaintiff Juan Delgado (an employee of APP but not of PJH) testified that PJH employees instructed APP employees how to more efficiently fill PJH's purchase orders.
Note:	Insufficient evidence showed PJH owed plaintiffs a duty of care under any recognized principles of tort law, as alleged or otherwise.
Citation:	B227522
WCC Citation:	WCC 38232011 CA

Case Name:	Demetry v. Leeds		03/29/2013
Summary:	DEMETRY v. LEEDS TAMMY DEMETRY et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. REBECCA LEEDS, Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Tammy Demetry, a clerk for the County of Orange, was taking a walk during her break when she was struck by a car driven by another County employee, Rebecca Leeds, as Leeds was exiting a driveway. On appeal, Demetry argues that Leeds failed to meet her burden of production in a manner warranting summary judgment. We disagree, finding that Leeds met her burden with relevant, admissible and undisputed evidence, while Demetry offered none on her own behalf. She crossed the driveway apron to the parking garage where Leeds was exiting, and Leeds struck Demetry with her car.
Note:	An Orange County clerical worker's negligence claim against a fellow county employee for striking her with a car was barred by exclusivity as a matter of law.
Citation:	G046951
WCC Citation:	WCC 39982013 CA