§Why CasetextPricing

SOUTH COAST FRAMING v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD (CLARK)

Petitioners, Berkshire Hathaway Homestate Companies and Redwood Fire and Casualty Company, Answer Brief on the Merits

22 Cited authorities

  1. Lamb v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.

    11 Cal.3d 274 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 348 times
    Reversing the Board's reversal of death benefit where work stress caused hypertension leading to death from heart disease

  2. Western Growers Ins. Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

    16 Cal.App.4th 227 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 137 times
    In Western Growers, the court held that continuing treatment between two periods of temporary disability constituted one cumulative trauma injury.

  3. Braewood Convalescent Hospital v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

    34 Cal.3d 159 (Cal. 1983)   Cited 157 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that witness bias could serve as a ground for rejecting uncontradicted testimony

  4. McAllister v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Bd.

    69 Cal.2d 408 (Cal. 1968)   Cited 142 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In McAllister v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board, 69 Cal.2d 408, 445 P.2d 313, 71 Cal.Rptr. 697 (1968), the California Supreme Court reversed an administrative denial of a workmen's compensation award to plaintiff, a fireman, who developed lung cancer after 32 years of fire-fighting and 42 years of smoking cigarettes.

  5. Estate of Teed

    112 Cal.App.2d 638 (Cal. Ct. App. 1952)   Cited 222 times
    Defining substantial evidence

  6. Rosas v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

    16 Cal.App.4th 1692 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 34 times

    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

  7. Martori Brothers Distributors v. Agri. Labor Rel. Bd.

    29 Cal.3d 721 (Cal. 1981)   Cited 38 times
    In Martori Brothers an employee was discharged allegedly for dual motives — disruptiveness on the job and union activity — only the former of which was a lawful reason.

  8. Universal City Studios v. Worker's Comp. App. Bd.

    99 Cal.App.3d 647 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979)   Cited 34 times
    In Universal Studios, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Lewis) (1979) 99 Cal.App.3d 647 [44 Cal.Comp.Cases 1133] (Lewis), the WCAB awarded an employee the scheduled rating for a semi-sedentary work restriction based on the findings of the agreed medical evaluator (AME).

  9. Colonial Ins. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.

    29 Cal.2d 79 (Cal. 1946)   Cited 93 times
    In Colonial Insurance Co. v. Industrial Accident Comm., Cal.Supr., 29 Cal.2d 79, 172 P.2d 884, 886 (1946), the California Supreme Court held that an employee suffering from a progressive occupational disease could recover from one or more of the successive carriers.

  10. Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

    122 Cal.App.3d 905 (Cal. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 27 times

    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

  11. Section 3600 - Generally

    Cal. Lab. Code § 3600   Cited 896 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Noting that liability for compensation under California's Workers’ Compensation Act is "in lieu of any other liability whatsoever to any person "

  12. Section 5952 - Scope of review by court

    Cal. Lab. Code § 5952   Cited 493 times

    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

  13. Section 3202 - Liberal construction

    Cal. Lab. Code § 3202   Cited 488 times

    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.

  14. Section 3202.5 - Preponderance of the evidence

    Cal. Lab. Code § 3202.5   Cited 169 times

    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

  15. Rule 8.208 - Certificate of Interested Entities or Persons

    Cal. R. 8.208   Cited 17 times

    (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

  16. Rule 1.22 - Recycled paper [Repealed]

    Cal. R. 1.22

    Cal. R. Ct. 1.22 Rule 1.22 repealed effective 1/1/2014; adopted effective 1/1/2007.