Case Name:	Bi-Coastal Payroll Services, Inc. v. CIGA		05/29/2009
Summary:	Plaintiffs believed the reserves set by CIGA were disproportionately high in relation to the age of the individual claims, representing an aggressive reserving policy on the part of CIGA. Plaintiffs also learned that CIGA set substantial reserves to cover incurred but not yet reported losses (IBNR), even though most of the claims being administered by CIGA were several years old. During the same period, CIGA commenced sending demand letters to the various payroll companies seeking direct reimbursement for benefits paid under the Legion policies. Despite CIGA's demand for reimbursement for benefits paid under the Legion policies, CIGA refused to provide meaningful access to the claims files. The named plaintiffs are: Bi-Coastal Payroll Services, Inc. ; Curiosity Payroll Services, Inc. ; Epicurean Services, Inc. ; Emerald Payroll Services, Inc. ; Film Payment Services, Inc. ; FPS Payroll Services, Inc. ; FSI Processing, Inc. ; Maize-El Services, Inc. ; Movie Payroll, Inc. ; Power Payroll, Inc. ; Producer Payroll, Inc. ; Production Processing, Inc. ; Quantos Payroll Service, Inc. ; Radar Payroll Services, Inc. ; Staff Payroll Services, Inc. ; Transcontinental Payroll, Inc. , d. b. a. West Coast Extras, Inc. ; West Coast Extras, Inc. ; X Rhode, Inc. ; Media Services.
Note:	Plaintiffs' duty to file notice of appeal arose from the service of notice of entry of judgment, not the service of the trial court's earlier minute order and that their appeal is therefore timely.
Citation:	B205969
WCC Citation:	WCC 35282009 CA

Case Name:	Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. WCAB and Paul Hunt		10/04/2010
Summary:	BIGGE CRANE & RIGGING CO. , Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND PAUL HUNT, Respondents. Introduction Respondent Paul Hunt was injured while assisting with the dismantling of a truck crane used during a shutdown operation at a refinery. In January 2002, he was hired by Bigge Crane to operate a 90-ton, Peck & Hiller truck crane at the Chevron refinery job site. In the meantime, Embry told the operator of another crane (an 80-ton truck crane) and Hunt, who was working as the oiler, to go and assist Mom. As Hunt points out, Bigge Crane was cited for violating several safety orders, including orders requiring employee training and the securing or blocking of crane booms.
Note:	Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. WCAB, A127136, (10/04/2010): An employer is not liable for a benefits increase under a
Citation:	A127136
WCC Citation:	WCC 36752010 CA

Case Name:	Biggers v. WCAB		01/21/1999
Summary:	Biggers contends that as a courtroom bailiff, her functions clearly came within the scope of active law enforcement, entitling her to those benefits. At the hearing, Biggers testified she worked as a deputy sheriff; her assignment was courtroom bailiff. The workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found Biggers was not an employee entitled to the benefits of Labor Code section 4850. At the hearing Biggers testified she was hired in 1989; she had been a bailiff for seven years. Based on this additional evidence, the WCJ found Biggers was entitled to benefits under Labor Code section 4850.
Note:	Courtroom bailiff's duties came within scope of active law enforcement.
Citation:	69 Cal.App.4th 431, 64 CCC 19
WCC Citation:	WCC 26871999 CA

Case Name:	Biloy v. WCAB (C.A. Rocha & Sons)		01/03/1975
Summary:	EMEGDIO BILOY, Petitioner v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; C. A. ROCHA & SONS; and PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondents. OPINION: Emegdio Biloy sustained an injury to his back in the scope of his employment as a cook, on April 9, 1969. After a hearing on petitioner's application the referee found that petitioner's temporary disability had lasted until June 26, 1972. The referee noted that it was 'difficult to determine exactly when applicant's condition became permanent, stationary, and ratable. The report stated that Mr. Biloy would be able to return to work on November 1, 1969.
Note:	Evidence in carrier's possession cannot be 'new' evidence absent good showing that ev. was 'undiscoverable'.
Citation:	40 CCC 35
WCC Citation:	WCC 27311975 CA

Case Name:	Bingener v. City of Los Angeles		01/09/2020
Summary:	Filed 12/16/19; Certified for Publication 1/9/20 (order attached) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .             MARK BINGENER et al. ,Plaintiffs and Appellants, .             v. .             CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al. ,Defendants and Respondents. .             B291112 .             (Los Angeles County Super. INTRODUCTION .             Mark and Eric Bingener appeal the trial court’s grant of the City of Los Angeles’s (City) motion for summary judgment. * .           We concur: .           LAVIN, Acting P. J. .           EGERTON, J. Filed 1/9/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE .           MARK BINGENER et al. ,Plaintiffs and Appellants, .           v. .           CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al. ,Defendantsand Respondents.
Note:	A California appellate court ruled that an employer's knowledge of an employee's compensable injury was not enough to impose tort liability for a fatal car accident.
Citation:	No. B291112
WCC Citation:	No. B291112

Case Name:	Bison Builders Inc. v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corp.		09/05/2012
Summary:	BISON BUILDERS INC. v. THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORPORATION BISON BUILDERS, INC. , Cross-Complainant and Appellant, v. THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORPORATION, Cross-Defendant and Respondent. Thyssen was a subcontractor for appellant general contractor Bison Builders, Inc. (Bison) in the construction of a hotel. Bison responded to the proposal with a 15-page form subcontract agreement entitled "Bison Builders, Inc. Subcontract Agreement," dated March 30, 2006. The trial court's instruction on retained control read as follows: "David Travis claims that he was damaged by an unsafe condition while employed by ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corporation and working on Bison Builders, Incorporated's property. To establish this claim, David Travis must prove all of the following: [¶] 1, that Bison Builders, Incorporated controlled the property; 2, that Bison Builders, Incorporated retained control over safety conditions at the work site; 3, that Bison Builders, Incorporated negligently exercised its retained control over safety conditions; 4, that David Travis was damaged; 5, that Bison Builders, Incorporated affirmatively contributed to David Travis' damage.
Note:	A general contractor is liable for its negligent control of a job site that contributed to a worker's spinal cord injury.
Citation:	A131622, A131623
WCC Citation:	WCC 39302012 CA

Case Name:	Blackburn v. WCAB		07/25/2008
Summary:	-ooOoo- *Before Levy, Acting P. J. , Dawson, J. , and Hill, J. Theresa Blackburn petitions this court in propria persona for a writ of review from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB). Blackburn did not file an Answer, but on February 19, 2008, the WCAB received a one-page letter objecting to FUSD's petition. Having failed to bring any of these issues to the attention of the WCAB on reconsideration, Blackburn has waived the issues before this court. The WCAB instead remanded the matter for further proceedings to determine if Blackburn was entitled to workers' compensation benefits related to her alleged psychological injury. Since Blackburn did not petition for reconsideration from the WCJ's findings and award and all other issues were affirmed by the WCAB, there is no issue before this court to review.
Note:	[Unpublished] Since Blackburn did not petition for reconsideration from the WCJ's findings and award and all other issues were affirmed by the WCAB, there is no issue before this court to review.
Citation:	F055123
WCC Citation:	WCC 34032008 CA

Case Name:	Blackledge v. Bank of America		06/03/2010
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. ADJ1735018 (LBO 0375311) OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION CYNTHIA BLACKLEDGE, Applicant, vs. BANK OF AMERICA; and ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s). BACKGROUND Applicant, Cynthia Blackledge (Blackledge), sustained an admitted industrial injury to her low back and her right wrist, hip, and knee on October 26, 2005 when she slipped while descending a flight of stairs. Dr. Pechman evaluated Blackledge and issued a report on May 14, 2007. Blackledge made a timely request to cross-examine the rater regarding the 0% recommended rating. The expert opinion of a single physician may establish an injured employee's WPI, provided that the opinion constitutes substantial evidence.
Note:	[En Banc] Physician's role is to assess the injured employee's whole person impairment percentage(s); WCJ's role is to frame instructions; rater's role is to issue a recommended permanent disability rating; WCJ is not bound by a rater's disability rating; must be no ex parte communication between the WCJ and the rater.
Citation:	ADJ1735018
WCC Citation:	WCC 36352010 CA

Case Name:	Blanchard v. WCAB		12/09/1975
Summary:	GEORGE M. BLANCHARD, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Kaufman, J. , with Tamura, Acting P. J. , and McDaniel, J. , concurring. )On July 21, 1970, Applicant was awarded permanent disability benefits based on a disability rating of 30 1/2 percent. Petitioner will file herein a medical evaluation report of applicant's condition in support of his petition herein at a later date. '4) or to set forth the facts relied upon to establish new and further disability under Labor Code, section 5410 (Cal. '(b) In all other cases by a petition setting forth specifically the facts relied upon to establish new and further disability. '
Note:	Faulty petition to reopen valid when it gives notice of being based on alleged increased disability.
Citation:	53 CA 3d 590, 40 CCC 784
WCC Citation:	WCC 27711975 CA

Case Name:	Bland v. WCAB		10/26/1970
Summary:	BLAND, Petitioner, v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, McPHAIL'S, INC. , et al. , Respondents. Although the board remained convinced that petitioner's condition was not yet permanent and stationary, it refused to award compensation for his temporary disability. Labor Code section 5803 provides that the board 'has continuing jurisdiction over all its orders, decisions, and awards. . . . 13. 13, at p. 409; 1 Hanna, Form 7. 1 (WCAB Form 42). )We have fully demonstrated that the petition to reopen in this case necessarily comprehended a request for temporary disability compensation.
Note:	Awkwardness in allegation does not restrict worker's right to compensation; Petition to Reopen need not request particular classification of compensation.
Citation:	3 Cal.3d 324, 35 CCC 513
WCC Citation:	WCC 26431970 CA

Case Name:	Bloch Medical Clinic v. WCAB		04/22/1997
Summary:	Bloch Medical Clinic, Petitioner v. Workers Compensation Appeals Board, Sonia Rodriguez, National Stores, Inc. , State Compensation Insurance Fund, Respondents. Civil No. B097283 Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five April 22, 1997 Counsel:For petitioner--Stephen M. Schwartz For respondents employer and insurer--Krimen, Klein, Da Silva, Daneri & Bloom, by Louis Harris For respondent WCAB--No appearance Opinion-By Grignon, Acting P. J. Petitioner Bloch Medical Clinic (Dr. Bloch) petitions for review of a decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denying reconsideration of an order of the Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) denying medical-legal expense and reducing claimed medical treatment charges. As to the other issues raised by Dr. Bloch, we found no error on the part of the Board. In February 1992, employee consulted an attorney, who referred her to, among others, Dr. Bloch, a psychiatrist. On February 21, 1992, the attorney requested medical treatment, but not a medical-legal evaluation, from Dr. Bloch.
Note:	Failure to pay or object in 60 days subject carrier to 10% penalty.
Citation:	62 CCC 589
WCC Citation:	WCC 28721997 CA

Case Name:	Blue Cross of CA. v. WCAB		04/10/1998
Summary:	Jurisdiction was reserved over the lien of Blue Cross. Defendant filed a DOR which was served on Blue Cross, and Blue Cross made no objection to the matter going forward. Yet, Blue Cross did not object to the DOR and request additional time to obtain the records and obtain a medical-legal report. Thus Blue Cross waived its right to perform additional discovery by failing to object to the declaration of readiness. The WCAB denied Blue Cross' Petition for Reconsideration and the appellate court denied its Petition for Writ of Review.
Note:	No denial of due process where Blue Cross could've requested continuance to obtain necessary records.
Citation:	63 CCC 604 (Writ Denied)
WCC Citation:	WCC 28031998 CA

Case Name:	Blumenfeld v. Qualcomm, Inc.		09/23/2010
Summary:	In 2001 Blumenfeld applied for and received a transfer into a programmer analyst position, reporting to Tange. In 2001, when Blumenfeld was transferred to his group, Tange was a network analyst, supervising five or six individuals. Rather, Blumenfeld and the other employees Tange supervised "raved about him" in performance reviews submitted confidentially to his supervisor. Blumenfeld said once Tange put her outside his "circle of trust" for a week and called her a "walrus. "Blumenfeld also submitted evidence that during the investigation of Tange, Qualcomm discovered that he had sexually harassed two other female employees.
Note:	Exclusive remedy did not bar a former employee's intentional infliction of emotional distress claim because she alleged that it resulted from her supervisor's despicable sexual harassment, the 4th District Court of Appeal concluded.
Citation:	D055441
WCC Citation:	WCC 36732010 CA

Case Name:	Board of Chiropractic Examiners v. Superior Court of Sacramento County (Carole Arbuckle)		02/26/2009
Summary:	Ct. No. 03AS00948 STATE BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS et al. , Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY, Respondent; CAROLE M. ARBUCKLE, Real Party in Interest. Here, the employee filed a complaint with the State Personnel Board, and the board issued adverse findings. She was hired as an office assistant by the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners (SBCE) and was eventually promoted to management services technician. The trial court denied the motion, but the Court of Appeal issued an alternative writ and stayed the proceedings in the trial court. Only then, the Court of Appeal held, could Arbuckle pursue a civil damages action in superior court.
Note:	An employee of the California Chiropractic Board of Examiners who claims she was harassed at work after pointing out that the board's chairwoman had been practicing without a license was not required to exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a civil whistleblower complaint.
Citation:	S151705
WCC Citation:	WCC 35002009 CA

Case Name:	Bock v. City of Healdsburg		05/30/2012
Summary:	* Appellant Lorie Bock sued her former employer, respondent City of Healdsburg (Healdsburg or City), alleging that she suffered various forms of discrimination while employed as a meter reader. Bradbury, in turn, reported to City finance director Tamera Haas, who herself reported to City manager Chester Wystepek. City manager Wystepek likewise testified that he was not aware of any problems that appellant had with her feet. (m)), appellant was required to prove, among other things, that "the City of Healdsburg thought that Lorie Bock had a physical condition that limited her ability to walk and/or her ability to work," or that "the City of Healdsburg knew that Lorie Bock had a physical condition that limited her ability to walk and/or her ability to work. (n)), appellant was required to prove, among other things, that appellant had a physical condition "that was known to the City of Healdsburg.
Note:	A Northern California trial judge did not err in instructing the jury on a meter reader's disability discrimination claims, a state appellate court ruled, upholding a jury's determination that the worker's complaints about her aching feet were insufficient to give her employer notice of her disabling medical condition and give rise to a duty to accommodate her.
Citation:	A132200
WCC Citation:	WCC 39012012 CA

Case Name:	Boehm & Assoc vs. WCAB		04/25/2003
Summary:	BOEHM & ASSOCIATES, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND INTERNATIONAL UNION OF HOTEL EMPLOYEES AND RESTAURANT EMPLOYEES et al. , Respondents. OPINION HULL, J. - Petitioner Boehm & Associates seeks review of a decision by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) restricting or denying recovery on several medical lien claims. The lien claim lists Boehm & Associates as the attorneys for MRCH. Nevertheless, Boehm & Associates filed the instant petition for review in its own name, on behalf of the medical providers. Because the uninsured employer denied industrial causation, the employee was forced to seek payment of medical expenses through Medi-Cal.
Note:	While W&I Code 14124.70 et seq. applies generally to WC liens, it does not apply where the settlement did not include consideration of existing lien claims.
Citation:	108 Cal.App.4th 137
WCC Citation:	WCC 29292003 CA

Case Name:	Bolanos v. Priority Business Services Part 1/2		03/09/2018
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 FOUR .             RENE BOLANOS, Plaintiff and Respondent, .             v. .             PRIORITY BUSINESS SERVICES, INC. , Defendant and Appellant. .             B280139 .             (Los Angeles County Super. .           Priority sent Bolanos to a clinic (selected by Priority) to get a medical checkup the next day. .           Bolanos resumed his practice of checking in with Priority in person or by phone to ask for work. . ” .           Cox similarly testified at trial that at the time Bolanos’s employment with Priority ended, Priority believed Bolanos had resigned.
Note:
Citation:	B280139
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC589714

Case Name:	Bolanos v. Priority Business Services Part 2/2		03/09/2018
Summary:	.           Bolanos additionally submitted itemized billing records supporting his fee request. .           In reply, Bolanos requested an additional $10,697. 08 in fees incurred in connection with the fee motion, supported by an attorney declaration and itemized billing record. .           Conversely, Priority claims that the court should not have excluded the survey of billing rates it submitted. .           “‘A contingent fee must be higher than a fee for the same legal services paid as they are performed. .         Priority again argues that the lodestar should be reduced to reflect Bolanos’s limited success in this litigation.
Note:
Citation:	B280139
WCC Citation:	Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC589714

Case Name:	Bolanos v. WCAB		10/03/2017
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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN . MARCOS BOLANOS, Petitioner, . v. .  WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and RAMIRO ZAPATA JIMENEZ et al. , Respondents. .  DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNINSURED EMPLOYERS BENEFITS TRUST FUND, Real Parties in Interest. .  B276784 .  (W. C. A. B. Case No. ADJ587312) .  ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS to review a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. .  Law Offices of Mark B. Simpkins and Mark B. Simpkins for Petitioner. .  We concur: .  PERLUSS, P. J.
Note:	Taxpayers are on the hook for a man's permanent total disability award after the California 2nd District Court of Appeals shot down the state's attempt to force a property owner to pay the benefits.
Citation:	B276784
WCC Citation:	W.C.A.B. Case No. ADJ587312

Case Name:	Bonner v. WCAB		11/29/1990
Summary:	KATHLEEN E. BONNER, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and State Compensation Insurance Fund, Respondents. In addition to petitioner and office manager Moodie, the employer had three other employees, Diana Resnick, Chris Bolton, and Anita Bottari. Petitioner, office manager Moodie, and employer Bonner each had a set of keys to the office. After a person entered the office door, a deadbolt lock customarily was secured by hand in order to relock the door. On October 17, 1986, the day of petitioner's accident, Moodie was the first to arrive at the office in the morning.
Note:	Board's failure to specify evidence relied upon, reasons for determination warrants reversal.
Citation:	225 Cal.App.3d 1023, 55 CCC 470
WCC Citation:	WCC 27341990 CA

Case Name:	Bontempo vs. WCAB		04/30/2009
Summary:	On April 14, 2003, Bontempo filed an Application for Adjudication of Claim with the Board, based on the knee injury (claim no. VNO 0471122). The hearing was taken off calendar when the parties decided to have Bontempo seen by an agreed medical examiner, Mason Hohl, M. D. , who examined and interviewed Bontempo and issued a report in November 2005. For claim no. VNO 0471122, the parties stipulated that on March 28, 2003, Bontempo, while employed by the City, "sustained industrial injury to his right knee. "Based on these findings, the hearing officer awarded Bontempo $49,256. 25 for the orthopedic claim (266. 25 times $185) and $39,600 for the pulmonary claim (180 times $220). G. Request for Reconsideration On January 18, 2008, Bontempo submitted a petition for reconsideration.
Note:	Alleging issues of permanent disability and apportionment on the pre-trial conference statement is sufficient to raise the issue of 4658(d)(2) increase at trial and on review.
Citation:	B207660
WCC Citation:	WCC 35192009 CA

Case Name:	Boughner v. Comp USA		06/02/2008
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION (EN BANC) SCOTT BOUGHNER, Applicant, vs. COMP USA, INC. ; and ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, Defendant. The APA specifically provides that "Article 8 (commencing with Section 11350) shall not apply to the Division of Workers' Compensation. "of Accountancy (1992) 2 Cal. 4th 999, 1014-1015; Life Care Centers of America v. CalOptima (2005) 133 Cal. App. 4th 1169, 1183. )v. Superior Court (1976) 16 Cal. 3d 392, 411] (internal citations and quotation marks omitted); see also Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Bd. 8, § 10341; Gee v. Workers' Comp.
Note:	[En Banc] Applicant failed to carry his burden of demonstrating that the AD's adoption of the 2005 PDRS was arbitrary and capricious, or inconsistent with section 4660(b)(2).
Citation:	SFO 0491230
WCC Citation:	WCC 33782008 CA

Case Name:	Bowen v. WCAB		06/24/1999
Summary:	In 1992, the Marlins drafted [73 Cal. App. 4th 18] Bowen and Mack advised Bowen of this fact by telephone. Mack and Bowen entered into negotiations and eventually reached an oral agreement as to bonus, salary, the farm team Bowen would play for, and the term of employment. In reaching its decision, the WCAB failed to follow its own previous decisions and appellate workers' compensation law cases. It is noteworthy that neither the WCAB nor the Marlins contend that since the Marlins had not yet signed the contract there was no contract formed in California when Bowen signed it. [1b] Applying the reasoning of GATX-Fuller here, we conclude that the Marlins was the offeror when it sent contracts to Bowen in California, and Bowen was the offeree when he signed and returned them from California.
Note:	Employee hired in CA is covered by CA work comp laws regardless of contract.
Citation:	73 Cal.App.4th 15, 64 CCC 745
WCC Citation:	WCC 4201999 CA

Case Name:	Boxer, Elkind and Gerson v. WCAB		09/01/1998
Summary:	Boxer, Elkind and Gerson, Petitioner v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Galaxy Lighting, Inc. , Northbrook Property and Casualty Insurance Company, St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, State of California/Subsequent Injuries Fund, Donna Cansino, Respondents. They claimed that the WCJ erred in relying on Goler v. W&J Sloane Co. (1979) 44 Cal. Cases 1065 (WCAB en banc), due to the fact that the present case was above average complexity, legitimating a higher award of attorney's fees. Cases 1065 (WCAB en banc), which the WCJ found was not overruled by Pilkenton and Tomlinson. The WCAB denied reconsideration of the matter, for the reasons proffered in the WCJ's report, which the WCAB adopted without further comment.
Note:	No grossly disproportionate attorney's fees in disability cases of similar complexity.
Citation:	63 CCC 1156
WCC Citation:	WCC 27121998 CA

Case Name:	Boyle v. Certainteed Corp.		03/10/2006
Summary:	Facts Plaintiffs are family members of Charles Edward Boyle who died in March 2002, allegedly from mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure. Plaintiffs filed a wrongful death action against CertainTeed Corporation (CertainTeed) and many other defendants. Plaintiffs also addressed the merits at length and submitted deposition transcripts, interrogatory responses, and documents as evidence allegedly showing decedent longshoreman's exposure to asbestos fibers imported by CertainTeed. Instead, CertainTeed insists that plaintiffs waived their challenge to General Order No. 157 by failing to raise the matter adequately in the trial court. Carlton v. Quint (2000) 77 Cal. App. 4th 690, upon which CertainTeed relies, is not to the contrary.
Note:	Order for expedited summary judgment for asbestos injury cases based merely on attorney certification is invalid.
Citation:	137 Cal. App. 4th 645
WCC Citation:	WCC 31472006 CA

Case Name:	Bracken vs. WCAB		09/25/1989
Summary:	THOMAS T. BRACKEN, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, COMMERCIAL CARRIERS, INC. , et al. , Respondents (Opinion by Klein, P. J. , with Danielson and Croskey, JJ. , concurring. )We hold the Board's decision must be annulled because the Board erred in concluding the cardiovascular injuries were not industrial. Specifically, that heart attack progressed in degree later that month and then gave rise in April, 1986, to a stroke. Dr. Gillis stated he knew of no medical literature that says the worse the heart attack, the greater the likelihood of stroke. It is common knowledge in medical literature that massive heart attacks go on to develop cerebral strokes soon thereafter.
Note:	Appellate court is not bound to accept the Board's factual findings where they are unreasonable or otherwise unsupported.
Citation:	214 Cal.App.3d 246
WCC Citation:	WCC 29311989 CA

Case Name:	Bradshaw v. Park		10/27/1994
Summary:	VICTORIA BRADSHAW, as Labor Commissioner, etc. , et al. , Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. DONALD PARK, Defendant and Appellant. ), P. J. Donald Park, doing business as Century Auto Body & Painting, appeals from a special judgment (Lab. 1 assessing a penalty of $2,000 against him for failure to obtain workers' compensation insurance in violation of section 3700. We conclude that entry of judgment against him does not offend any constitutional principles and affirm the judgment. Attached to the request was a document from the Department of Industrial Relations Division of Labor Standards Enforcement entitled 'Stop Order - Penalty Assessment. '
Note:	DIR's Stop Order not in violation of due process, separation of powers, or 'principle of check'.
Citation:	29 Cal.App.4th 1267
WCC Citation:	WCC 24321994 CA

Case Name:	Branco v. Race Street Fish & Poultry (WCAB En Banc)		01/31/1978
Summary:	Reconsideration was granted in order to further study and research the application of the Board's en banc decision in Cabello v. NL Industries [(1976)] 41 CCC 605. A $ 200. 00 attorney's fee was awarded by the trial judge from the applicant's portion of the stipulated award. The Board in their en banc decision applied Quinn v. State of California [(1975)] 15 Cal. 1, 539 P. 2d 761] and apportioned the $ 200. 00 attorney's fee between the Employment Development Department and the applicant's portion of the award. Like the instant case, Quinn dealt with a claim by an employee for apportionment of the attorney's fee.
Note:	Lien claimant responsible for 'fair share' of atty. fee award under certain circumstances.
Citation:	43 CCC 10
WCC Citation:	WCC 27161978 CA

Case Name:	Brannan v. Lathrop Construction Associates, Inc.		05/21/2012
Summary:	BRANNAN v. LATHROP CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATES, INC. BRIAN BRANNAN et al. , Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. LATHROP CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATES, INC. , Defendant and Respondent. While working for a masonry subcontractor at a school construction site, Brian Brannan slipped on wet scaffolding and injured his back. He sued the general contractor, Lathrop Construction Associates, Inc. (Lathrop), alleging his injuries were caused by Lathrop's negligence in sequencing and coordinating construction work at the site, and failing to call a "rain day" to protect workers from dangerous conditions caused by slippery surfaces. Lathrop did not direct Garcia or Brannan on how the masonry was to be laid. In Ray, an employee of a bridge construction subcontractor was killed by construction debris blown by the wind from a bridge under construction onto a public roadway, as he was attempting to clear other debris from the roadway.
Note:	An injured construction worker's negligence claim against the contractor directing the construction project where he was injured failed as a matter of law since he could not establish that the contractor's retained control over the jobsite affirmatively contributed to his injuries.
Citation:	A129695
WCC Citation:	WCC 38972012 CA

Case Name:	Brasher v. Nationwide Studio Fund		09/05/2006
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA Case No. OAK 0296709 DEANNA BRASHER, Applicant, vs. NATIONWIDE STUDIO FUND; and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendant(s). Defendant referred this request for surgery to utilization review and, on February 17, 2006, denied Dr. Park's request, based on the utilization review report. Additionally, on February 21, 2006, defendant filed a DWC Form 233 Objection To Treating Physician's Recommendation For Spinal Surgery with the Administrative Director. You then have 10 days from receipt of the second request of treating physician's report containing the recommendation for spinal surgery. Whether the Division of Workers' Compensation Medical Unit appropriately followed procedures set forth in Labor Code Sections 4062(b) and 4610.
Note:	Where statutory process has been followed for spinal surgery second opinion, and the delay is due solely to the DWC's failure to comply with its obligation under section 4062(b), there is no reasonable basis for terminating the second opinion process.
Citation:	71 Cal. Comp. Cases 1282
WCC Citation:	WCC 31792006 CA