Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ6980671

Regular

Mar 03, 2011

FLOR GUTIERREZ vs. B & H EDUCATION, INC., EXPLORER INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

The Appeals Board denied the defendant employer's petition for removal, an extraordinary remedy, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable injury. The defendant's petition was also found to be untimely. The Board agreed with the Administrative Law Judge's report, which highlighted that the defendant had ample opportunity for discovery and had agreed to bifurcate the 132(a) claim. The Board concluded that the defendant's acquiescence in setting the trial date waived their right to object.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for RemovalAdministrative Law JudgeSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable InjuryLabor Code Section 132(a)BifurcationMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscoveryCase in Chief

References

Case No. ADJ10272888

Regular

Apr 30, 2019

JOSE SEQUEN vs. JOANNE LESLIE & WALTER JOHNSON, STATE FARM, administered by SEDGWICK; JOEL GOMEZ LAWN CARE & TREE SERVICE; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied a petition for reconsideration in the case of Jose Sequen. The Board adopted the WCJ's report and reasoning, giving great weight to the judge's credibility determinations based on observing witness demeanor. The employer bears the burden of proving an injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment. The Board affirmed that the applicant sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment, referencing case law defining the broad scope of compensable activities.

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationsburden of proofdeviation from job dutiesunauthorized departurescope of activitiesacquiescenceimplied authorizationcompensable injury

References

Case No. SFO 0499272

Regular

Jul 07, 2008

Helen Miller vs. Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that Helen Miller was an employee of Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center and sustained an industrial injury to her left ankle. The Board found Miller was not a volunteer due to the extensive benefits received and the employer's control, and her jogging injury during a lunch break was a reasonable expectancy of employment, not barred by Labor Code section 3600(a)(9). Therefore, her injury arose out of and occurred in the course of her employment.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardHelen MillerGreen Gulch Farm and Zen CenterEverest National InsuranceGallagher BassettSFO 0499272Opinion and Decision After ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 3351Labor Code Section 3352(i)Employee definition

References

Showing 1-3 of 3 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

FLOR GUTIERREZ vs. B & H EDUCATION, INC., EXPLORER INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST

JOSE SEQUEN vs. JOANNE LESLIE & WALTER JOHNSON, STATE FARM, administered by SEDGWICK; JOEL GOMEZ LAWN CARE & TREE SERVICE; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

AOE/COEPetition for ReconsiderationWCJ credibility determinationsburden of proofdeviation from job dutiesunauthorized departurescope of activitiesacquiescenceimplied authorizationcompensable injury

Helen Miller vs. Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center, EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE