Case Name:	Estrada v. WCAB		11/05/1997
Summary:	OPINION CROSKEY, Acting P.J. - In this petition for writ of mandate challenging a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (the Board or WCAB), Miguel A.Estrada (Estrada), the injured worker, requests relief from the Board's decision regarding his rights to vocational rehabilitation temporary disability (VRTD). 7 The issue of whether the parties' vocational rehabilitation provision could be enforced resurfaced in a disagreement between Estrada and defendants over whether Estrada was entitled to receive retroactive VRTD and retroactive 'maintenance allowance. '8 Defendants asserted they had properly delayed giving Estrada vocational rehabilitation benefits, including VRTD, until January 25, l994, because Estrada was examined by Dr.Endler on that [58 Cal. App. 4th 1465] day. In contrast, Estrada asserted he was entitled to VRTD retroactive to a date prior to January 25, 1994. She determined that as a QIW, Estrada was owed VRTD for the period April 17, 1990, through January 24, 1994.
Note:	Commutation allowed if good faith issue that might defeat applicant's claim for all benefits exists (Thomas finding).
Citation:	58 Cal.App.4th 1458, 62 CCC 1384
WCC Citation:	WCC 26141997 CA

Case Name:	Estrada v. WCAB		11/05/1997
Summary:	OPINION CROSKEY, Acting P.J. - In this petition for writ of mandate challenging a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (the Board or WCAB), Miguel A.Estrada (Estrada), the injured worker, requests relief from the Board's decision regarding his rights to vocational rehabilitation temporary disability (VRTD). 7 The issue of whether the parties' vocational rehabilitation provision could be enforced resurfaced in a disagreement between Estrada and defendants over whether Estrada was entitled to receive retroactive VRTD and retroactive 'maintenance allowance. '8 Defendants asserted they had properly delayed giving Estrada vocational rehabilitation benefits, including VRTD, until January 25, l994, because Estrada was examined by Dr.Endler on that [58 Cal. App. 4th 1465] day. In contrast, Estrada asserted he was entitled to VRTD retroactive to a date prior to January 25, 1994. She determined that as a QIW, Estrada was owed VRTD for the period April 17, 1990, through January 24, 1994.
Note:	Absent express approval by WCJ in Order Approving, Thomas request inapplicable.
Citation:	58 Cal.App.4th 1458
WCC Citation:	WCC 4051997 CA

Case Name:	Evans v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co.		03/27/2008
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE No.B192848 March 27, 2008 ESSIE EVANS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v.MUTUAL OF OMAHA INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. Plaintiff and appellant Essie Evans (Evans) appeals a judgment following a grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant and respondent Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company (Mutual) in an action for breach of contract and bad faith arising out of Mutual's refusal to pay benefits under an accident insurance policy. Mutual further argued that regardless of what Evans now asserted, she previously had conceded before the WCAB that it was "the long lingering 'cumulative . Mutual averred that Evans was barred by judicial estoppel from now taking a legal position diametrically opposed to the position she took in another tribunal. Thereafter, Evans filed a timely notice of appeal from the judgment in favor of Mutual.
Note:	[Unpublished] Because Plaintiff has previously, and successfully, argued to another tribunal that decedent's death was due to cumulative job stress over a period of many years, Plaintiff is judicially estopped from asserting the loss of life was an 'accidental result of standing' so as to entitle her to benefits under the accidental death policy.
Citation:	B192848
WCC Citation:	WCC 33322008 CA

Case Name:	Evans v. Sunamoto		12/09/2010
Summary:	JONATHAN EVANS et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents,v. RONALD KENT SUNAMOTO et al. , Defendants and Appellants. INTRODUCTION Appellants Ronald Kent Sunamoto (Sunamoto) and Keystone Freight Corporation (Keystone) appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants Jonathan Evans (Evans) and Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (Travelers). FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The complaint was initially filed on February 6, 2007, in Stanislaus County by Evans. Evans alleged that he was injured in a motor vehicle accident while Sunamoto was driving in the course of his employment with Keystone. Travelers filed a complaint in intervention, seeking reimbursement of the workers' compensation benefits it had paid Evans.
Note:	A Los Angeles Superior Court was correct to deny a defense attorneys last-minute request to withdraw his waiver of a jury.
Citation:	B218630
WCC Citation:	WCC 36892010 CA

Case Name:	Evard v. Southern California Edison		07/11/2007
Summary:	Plaintiffs Daniel Evard and Christina Evard, and defendant and cross-complainant Southern California Edison (SCE), appeal from a summary judgment entered for defendants Heywood Outdoor Advertising, Inc.(Heywood) and Western Empire Industries, Inc.(Western Empire) in plaintiffs' personal injury action. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On June 23, 2004, plaintiffs Daniel Evard and Christina Evard filed a complaint against defendants SCE, Heywood, and William H.Dagg and the William H.Dagg Trust (Dagg). Before the accident, however, Evard did not tie his harness to the ladder he stood on at the top of the billboard. As Evard attempted to place a metal bar into vinyl at the corner of the billboard, he felt "zapped" and "jolted. "Costs on appeal are awarded to plaintiffs Daniel Evard and Christina Evard and defendant and cross-complainant Southern California Edison.
Note:	A nondelegable duty is a definite affirmative duty the law imposes on one by reason of his or her relationship with others. One cannot escape this duty by entrusting it to an independent contractor.
Citation:	153 Cal. App. 4th 137
WCC Citation:	WCC 32352007 CA

Case Name:	Ezra v. State of California Dep't of Health Services		09/07/2010
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN HABTNESH EZRA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v.STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES et al. , Defendants and Respondents. In January of 2007, DHS filed a Form 1099 with the IRS reporting the payment of the settlement to Ezra. *fn3The violation is identified as respondents' act of filing the Form 1099 with the IRS "in an effort to harm Ezra. "(The Capital Gold Group, Inc.v.Nortier ( 2009) 176 Cal. App. 4th 1119, 1127; see also, Leader v.Health Indus. Ezra asks this court to reinstate her claim against respondents "by returning it from a state of make-believe to its reality. "
Note:	An employer's filing of a Form 1099 with the Internal Revenue Service about a former employee's settlement was not an act of retaliation because it was a business necessity, the 2nd District Court of Appeal concluded.
Citation:	B216144
WCC Citation:	WCC 36642010 CA

Case Name:	Ezzy v. WCAB		08/19/1983
Summary:	Marilyn Ezzy (hereafter Ezzy) at all relevant times was employed by the law firm of Gassett, Perry & Frank (hereafter GPF) as a law clerk. The record of the WCAB hearing discloses that GPF participated in a softball league composed primarily of civil defense law firms. Ezzy testified that she did not volunteer but was 'drafted' to join the team. Ezzy understood there was a coed requirement, and when there appeared to be shortage of women, the female members were urged to get out and play. Ezzy stated that the firm paid for postgame pizza and other refreshments.
Note:	Law clerk injured in employer-sponsored softball game rx. believed was in course of employment.
Citation:	146 Cal.App.3d 252, 48 CCC 611
WCC Citation:	WCC 28051983 CA

Case Name:	Facundo-Guerrero v. WCAB		06/02/2008
Summary:	He filed a writ of review with this court after a Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) decision determined that he was entitled to benefits covering only 24 chiropractic treatments, as specified by section 4604. 5(d). We reject all of these constitutional challenges to section 4604. 5(d), and affirm the decision of the WCAB. A hearing was held before a WCAB judge (WCJ) on February 16, 2007,*fn2 and an initial decision was issued on March 9. The WCAB granted reconsideration and adopted the September 5 decision of the WCJ as its own. In Costa, an electrician filed a claim for benefits with the WCAB and requested an expedited hearing because he was in " 'dire need of medical treatment, including home care. '
Note:	There is nothing unconstitutional about Labor Code section 4604.5(d). The Legislature has legal authority to enact a law limiting petitioner's right to receive chiropractic treatment.
Citation:	A119814
WCC Citation:	WCC 33772008 CA

Case Name:	Faigin v. Signature Group Holdings, Inc.		12/05/2012
Summary:	FAIGIN v.SIGNATURE GROUP HOLDINGS, INC.ALAN W.FAIGIN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v.SIGNATURE GROUP HOLDINGS, INC. , Defendant and Appellant. Signature Group Holdings, Inc. , formerly known as Fremont Reorganizing Corporation (FRC), appeals a judgment awarding Alan W.Faigin $1,347,000 in damages for breach of an implied-in-fact agreement to terminate his employment only for good cause. When the FRC board of directors considered hiring a new management group, Faigin informed the directors and major shareholders of his objections to the proposal. The new management group was formally appointed to FRC in December 2007, including a President, a Chief Executive Officer and a General Counsel replacing Faigin in those positions. FRC argued that any employment relationship between Faigin and FRC must be based on FRC's conduct rather than Fremont General's conduct.
Note:	Fremont General's former general counsel won a $1.35 million breach of employment contract suit against its successor, after an appellate court agreed that he was terminated without good cause.
Citation:	B224598
WCC Citation:	WCC 39552012 CA

Case Name:	Fain v. WCAB		11/13/2008
Summary:	Fain v.Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, No.F056026 (Cal. App.Dist. 5 113/2008) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT No.F056026 November 13, 2008 DIANNA FAIN, PETITIONER, v.WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND CITY OF FRESNO POLICE DEPARTMENT, RESPONDENTS. Code, § 3212. 1. *fn2 ) Not finding sufficient basis upon which to invoke the presumption, we agree with the WCAB. BACKGROUND Bruce Fain (Fain) worked as a police officer for the City of Fresno (Fresno) from May 29, 1972, until August 17, 2006. Fain subsequently passed away and his wife pursued his workers' compensation claim. Adopting the WCJ's findings, the WCAB did not find any evidence Fain was ever exposed to a known carcinogen while working for Fresno as a police officer.
Note:	The widow of a Fresno police detective was unable to prove that her husband's fatal brain cancer arose from his work.
Citation:	F056026
WCC Citation:	WCC 34622008 CA