Case Name:	Gin v. Pennsylvania Life Insurance Co.		12/09/2005
Summary:	IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO No.A109541 December 9, 2005 KIMBERLY GIN, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v.PENNSYLVANIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT. The superior court granted summary judgment to the insurance carrier, Pennsylvania Life Insurance Company (Penn Life), holding that appellant Kimberly Gin's disability was not the result of an "accidental bodily injury" and thus not covered under the policy. On September 13, 1996, Gin applied for a disability insurance policy from Penn Life. Gin made a claim for disability benefits to Penn Life on October 10, 1996. Gin sued Penn Life for breach of contract in the Alameda County Superior Court on March 15, 2001.
Note:	Carpal tunnel syndrome not deemed 'accidental bodily injury' under insurance policy.
Citation:	134 Cal. App. 4th 939
WCC Citation:	WCC 31312005 CA

Case Name:	Glass Containers, Inc. v. IAC		12/03/1953
Summary:	GLASS CONTAINERS, INC.(a Corporation), Petitioner, v.INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION and ELIZABETH B.HART et al. , Respondents. The commission thereafter made the award here attacked in favor of Industrial and against petitioner for a portion of the total liability. It is petitioner's position that the commission is without jurisdiction to make such an award. Industrial conceives itself to be a 'third person' in whose favor a liability is imposed for compensation by 'this division' (Lab. [121 Cal. App. 2d 660] Section 4903 imposes certain liens which the commission may allow 'against any amount to be paid as compensation. '
Note:	Liens allowed for advances of credit for nec. living expenses, not for satisfying a contractual debt.
Citation:	121 Cal.App.2d 656, 18 CCC 305
WCC Citation:	WCC 25011953 CA

Case Name:	Globe Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission		11/26/1934
Summary:	November 26, 1934 GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY (A CORPORATION), PETITIONER, v.INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION AND ALOYSIUS MARMUROWICZ, RESPONDENTS. PROCEEDING to review an order of the Industrial Accident Commission awarding compensation for personal injuries. In the course of the argument Miss Marshall told Marmurowicz to "shut up" and then referred to him as a "dirty Polack". Again, in Globe Indemnity Co.v.Industrial Acc. (Globe Indemnity Co.v.Industrial Acc.
Note:	Claimant entitled to benefits for injury caused by assault if traceable to incident of employment.
Citation:	2 Cal. 2d 8
WCC Citation:	WCC 31121934 CA

Case Name:	Go v. Sutter Solano Medical Center		09/25/2017
Summary:	WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD  STATE OF CALIFORNIA .             BELINDA GO, Appllcant, .             v..             SUTTER SOLANO MEDICAL CENTER, permissibly self-insured, Defendant. .             Case No.ADJ10168011 (San Francisco District Office) .             OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION .             Applicant admittedly ·sustained industrial injury to her neck while working for defendant as a registered nurse on June 9, 2013. .             The WCJ provided a Report & Recommendation On Petition For Reconsideration (Report) recommending that reconsideration be denied. .           WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD .           JOSE H.RAZO .           I CONCUR, .           FRANK M.BRASS .           KATHERINE ZALEWSKI .           DATED AND FILED AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA .           SEP 2 5 2017 Rule 10848 provides as follows: "When a petition for reconsideration, removal or disqualification has been timely filed, supplemental petitions or pleadings or responses either than the answer shall be considered only when specifically requested or approved by the Appeals Board. "Â
Note:
Citation:	ADJ10168011
WCC Citation:	ADJ10168011

Case Name:	Go v. Zimpel		04/18/2017
Summary:	.             A144806 .             (Contra Costa County Super. Go sued Gary Zimpel and Zimpel’s employer, Contra Costa County (County),1 for damages related to the car accident. Zimpel failed to stop and rear-ended the postal truck, which was “pushed into” Go’s sedan. According to Zimpel, he was driving at 10 to 15 miles per hour before the collision, and “the impact of the collision was minor. ” Neither Zimpel, his passenger, nor the driver of the postal truck was injured in the collision. .           We concur: .           _________________________ Richman, Acting P. J..           _________________________ Stewart, J.
Note:
Citation:	A144806
WCC Citation:	Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. C12-00363

Case Name:	Godinez vs. Buffets, Inc.; SRS		10/04/2004
Summary:	As noted above, the RU issued its determination on July 17, 2003. Defendant filed an appeal (which was served on applicant's attorney) at the District Office that was stamped:"DWC/WCAB-RECD/Filed Aug 05 2003-San Jose. "For this reason, and cognizant of public policy in favor of hearing cases on their merits (Litzmann v.Workers' Comp. Nevertheless, there remains a question as to what "timely" means when the statutory definition of "timely" has been repealed. In 2004, former section 139. 5 was re-enacted, with modifications, to apply to injuries occurring before January 1, 2004 (2004 ch.
Note:	Timeliness of voc rehab appeal for injuries prior to 1/04 governed by former Labor Code section 4645(d).
Citation:	69 CCC 1311; Panel
WCC Citation:	WCC 30632004 CA

Case Name:	Golchini v. State		02/28/2012
Summary:	GOLCHINI v.STATE HASSAN GOLCHINI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v.THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR, et al. , Defendants and Respondents. When Golchini began to "speak up" about the matter in December 2005, he allegedly found himself in a "hostile environment. "On March 14, 2008, at a hearing at which Golchini did not appear, he was expelled from the university. CSU is a state government entity, and to the extent Golchini seeks to hold CSU liable for damages, he must allege compliance with the claims presentation requirement of the Tort Claims Act. The second amended complaint does not mention section 1983, and Golchini did not raise this argument in the trial court.
Note:	The exclusive remedy of workers' compensation barred a student librarian's suit against the Board of Trustees of California State University.
Citation:	A129409
WCC Citation:	WCC 386329012 CA

Case Name:	Gold v. City of San Diego		09/03/2009
Summary:	This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8. 1115.COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA STEVEN GOLD, Plaintiff and Respondent, v.CITY OF SAN DIEGO, Defendant and Appellant. Ct.No.No.37-2007-00073294-CU-WM-CTL) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Joan M.Lewis, Judge. The City of San Diego (City) denied city employee Steven Gold's request for an industrial leave benefit after he injured his back on the job. Background Gold has been employed by the City as a deputy city attorney since 1988. In opposition, the City asserted the hearing officer properly rejected Gold's claim because Gold never filed a written report for the 1992 injury.
Note:	[Unpublished] Because there is no requirement that a preexisting injury be documented in a written report to qualify it as service connected, and based on the showing that claimant's 2005 injury was an aggravation of a preexisting back condition that was work related and not the result of a congenital condition, claimant is entitled to the industrial leave benefit.
Citation:	D053367
WCC Citation:	WCC 35602009 CA

Case Name:	Goler v. W&J Sloane Co. (WCAB En Banc)		12/07/1979
Summary:	The Workers' Compensation Judge allowed an attorney fee of $ 5,000 to the law firm of Bryan and Etting, petitioners herein. Section 10775 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board provides as follows: '§ 10775. 'For many years, the 'rule of thumb' has been that attorney fees should approximate 10% of the award or compromise and release. The Board will therefore affirm the workers' compensation judge's finding that $ 5,000 represents a reasonable fee for applicant's attorney's services. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD Melvin S.Witt, Chairman John F.Dunlap Gordon R.Gaines Mervin N.Glow H.J.Martin C.L.Swezey Robert E.Burton
Note:	Complexity determination for awarding attorney fee in 100% PD cases; 621.25 week limit, WCJ discretion.
Citation:	44 CCC 1065
WCC Citation:	WCC 27131979 CA

Case Name:	Gomez v. LA County Employees Retirement Assn.		09/25/2012
Summary:	GOMEZ v.LOS ANGELES COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSN. RICHARD GOMEZ, Plaintiff and Respondent, v.LOS ANGELES COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Appellant. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS SUZUKAWA, J.Appellant Los Angeles County Employees' Retirement Association (LACERA) appeals from a judgment granting respondent Richard Gomez's petition for a writ of mandate. It entered a judgment directing LACERA to vacate its prior decision and to enter a new decision granting Gomez a service-connected disability retirement. BACKGROUND In October 1989, Gomez was hired as a deputy sheriff by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
Note:	A former deputy sheriff with a history of on-duty back injuries and an aggressive tumor in his spine was not entitled to service-connected disability retirement benefits.
Citation:	B237426
WCC Citation:	WCC 39342012 CA