Docket Nos. C014083, C014491. June 9, 1993. Page 1693 COUNSEL Boxer, Elkind Gerson and Barry J. Williams for Petitioner in No. C014083 and for Respondents in No. C014491. Steven Tanenbaum for Petitioners in No. C014491. Thomas McBirnie, Hanna, Brophy, MacLean, McAleer Jensen and George W. Hatfield for Respondents in Nos. C014083 and C014491. OPINION PUGLIA, P.J. In consolidated petitions for writ of review, the petitioners challenge the denial of workers' compensation benefits for a waste water treatment
Docket No. 60977. August 24, 1981. COUNSEL Booth, Mitchell, Strange Smith and James Ruiz for Petitioner. Schermer Rand, Jack Goodchild and Jeffrey Anson for Respondents. OPINION ROTH, P.J. Petitioner Insurance Company of North America (hereinafter INA) contends that respondent Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) erred in denying INA's petition for reconsideration of the decision of the workers' compensation judge finding that (1) respondent Myrna R. Kemp (applicant) sustained injury to her
The review by the court shall not be extended further than to determine, based upon the entire record which shall be certified by the appeals board, whether: (a) The appeals board acted without or in excess of its powers. (b) The order, decision, or award was procured by fraud. (c) The order, decision, or award was unreasonable. (d) The order, decision, or award was not supported by substantial evidence. (e) If findings of fact are made, such findings of fact support the order, decision, or award
This division and Division 5 (commencing with Section 6300) shall be liberally construed by the courts with the purpose of extending their benefits for the protection of persons injured in the course of their employment. Ca. Lab. Code § 3202 Amended by Stats. 1986, Ch. 248, Sec. 158.
All parties and lien claimants shall meet the evidentiary burden of proof on all issues by a preponderance of the evidence in order that all parties are considered equal before the law. "Preponderance of the evidence" means that evidence that, when weighed with that opposed to it, has more convincing force and the greater probability of truth. When weighing the evidence, the test is not the relative number of witnesses, but the relative convincing force of the evidence. Ca. Lab. Code § 3202.5 Amended
(a)Purpose and intent The California Code of Judicial Ethics states the circumstances under which an appellate justice must disqualify himself or herself from a proceeding. The purpose of this rule is to provide justices of the Courts of Appeal with additional information to help them determine whether to disqualify themselves from a proceeding. (b)Application This rule applies in appeals in civil cases other than family, juvenile, guardianship, and conservatorship cases. (Subd (b) adopted effective
Cal. R. Ct. 1.22 Rule 1.22 repealed effective 1/1/2014; adopted effective 1/1/2007.