September 2010

Donna Westlake vs. Auto Dealers Compensation Of California/marin Luxury Cars Llc, Administered By Intercare Insurance Services

This case involves Donna Westlake and Auto Dealers Compensation of California/Marin Luxury Cars LLC, administered by Intercare Insurance Services. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Removal, stating that removal is an extraordinary remedy which is rarely exercised by the Board absent a showing that substantial prejudice or irreparable injury will result if removal is not granted. The Board found that, based on their review of the record, substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would not result if removal was denied. The Petition for Removal was denied.

Marcia Pratt vs. Wells Fargo Bank, Specialty Risk Pleasanton

In this case, Marcia Pratt, an employee of Wells Fargo Bank, sustained an industrial injury to her psyche and dermatitis as a compensable consequence. She settled her claim by stipulated award on March 5, 2009, for 82% permanent disability and further medical treatment. Later, on July 9, 2010, the parties agreed to a Compromise and Release in the total sum of $485,000.00. The WCJ initially awarded lien claimant the sum of $15,000.00 as an attorney’s fee for services rendered in connection with the Compromise and Release Agreement. However, after reconsideration, the WCJ amended the award of attorney’s fees to award the sum of $21,752

Phillip Neely vs. Gte Corporation/ace Usa As Administered By Broadspire

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by the defendant, GTE Corporation/ACE USA as administered by Broadspire, with regard to a decision filed on July 15, 2010. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration in order to allow sufficient opportunity to further study the factual and legal issues in the case and to enable them to issue a just and reasoned decision. All further correspondence, objections, motions, requests and communications were to be filed with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board.

Penny Munian, vs. Oakdale Joint Unified School District,

In this case, Penny Munian sought reconsideration of a decision filed on July 8, 2010. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted the petition for reconsideration in order to allow sufficient opportunity to further study the factual and legal issues in the case. All further correspondence, objections, motions, requests and communications were to be filed with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board.

Jose Molina vs. Consolidated Foundries; Chartis Costa Mesa

is a case in which Jose Molina, the applicant, sought reconsideration of the July 30, 2010 Findings and Award, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that the applicant sustained an industrial cumulative liauma injury through October 1, 2007 to his bilateral shoulders, right carpal tunnel, bilateral knees, and right hand. The WCJ also found that the applicant sustained 27% permanent disability. The WCJ denied the petition for reconsideration, but the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and returned the case to the WCJ for further proceedings and a new decision. The Board found that the WCJ failed to decide all issues presented to him and failed to adequately explain the basis for his decision as required by Labor

Rosa Macias, vs. Glenridge Center; Travelers Insurance,

: In this case, Rosa Macias filed a workers’ compensation claim against Glenridge Center and Travelers Insurance. New Age Pharmaceuticals filed a lien claim in response to the claim. The Workers’ Compensation Judge issued a Notice of Intention to Disallow the lien claim, and New Age Pharmaceuticals failed to respond. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration as untimely and issued a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions in the amount of $500.00 against New Age Pharmaceuticals for their failure to appear at the trial and for filing an untimely and inappropriate Petition for Reconsideration.

David Lennon, vs. American Civil Contractors, Arch Insurance; Unger Construction’ ,and State compensation Insurance Fund

This case involves a worker’s compensation claim by David Lennon against American Civil Contractors, Arch Insurance, Unger Construction, and the State Compensation Insurance Fund. The worker’s compensation administrative law judge found that Lennon sustained industrial injury to his shoulder, right wrist, right elbow, and right shoulder on October 14, 2008 and September 16, 2006, respectively. The judge awarded Lennon temporary disability indemnity and further medical treatment to be administered by Arch Insurance, with any issue as to contribution deferred. The judge also found that Boehm & Associates was entitled to reimbursement for the lien filed on October 21, 2009 and December 8, 2009. Arch Insurance sought reconsideration of the decision, arguing that the amount of the costs claimed may exceed the cost of treatment pursuant

Bonnie .johnson, vs. Albertson’s, Inc., Permissibly Self-insured, Administered By Specialty Risk Services,

In this case, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and amended the July 7, 2010 Joint Findings and Order to reflect that the defendant was liable for a 25% penalty on the denied medical treatment from March 2008 to August 18, 2008. The Board also ordered that the defendant pay the applicant’s attorney a fee pursuant to Labor Code section 5814.5.