April 2016

LERHONE WILLIAMS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES, Legally Uninsured And Administered By YORK RISK SERVICES GROUP

is a case in which LeRhone Williams, an applicant, filed a petition for reconsideration against the State of California, In Home Supportive Services, legally uninsured and administered by York Risk Services Group, defendants. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for reconsideration, ruling that Williams did not sustain a separate and distinct injury on December 5, 2013 during a medical-legal evaluation.

STEVEN SCOGGINS vs. ULTRA-MAR, INC., BROADSPIRE

This case is about Ultra-Mar, Inc., Broadspire and Steven Scoggins. Steven Scoggins filed a workers’ compensation claim against Ultra-Mar, Inc., Broadspire. The workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that a notice of intention (NIT) to allow the $2,475.00 lien of Advance Radiology was issued with no response received and allowed the lien. Ultra-Mar, Inc., Broadspire sought reconsideration of the Order Allowing Lien, asserting that the underlying claim settled by Order Approving Compromise and Release (OACR) on August 28, 1993; that the law firm representing defendant at that time ceased operation in 1998; that,

GABRIEL GALLAND vs. LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Permissibly Self-Insured

In this case, Gabriel Galland sought reconsideration of a decision filed on February 5, 2016. 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 relating to the petition must be filed with the Office of the Commissioners of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board and not with the district office from which the WCJ’s decision issued.

GARY WHITLEY vs. EBMUD, Permissibly Self-insured, Adjusted By ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS

is a case in which Gary Whitley, the applicant, sought reconsideration of a decision made by the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. The Board granted the petition for reconsideration, allowing for further study of the factual and legal issues in the case. All further correspondence, objections, motions, requests and communications relating to the petition must be filed with the Office of the Commissioners of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board.

MOHAMMAD SARHADDI vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Legally Uninsured, Adjusted By STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

In this case, the California Department of Transportation (Defendant) sought reconsideration of an Order of Commutation of Future Payments issued by a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The Defendant argued that the applicant’s petition for commutation was not properly served upon them, thus depriving them of their due process rights. The WCJ recommended that reconsideration be granted and that the January 20, 2016 Order be rescinded and that this matter be returned to the trial level. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board granted the Petition for Reconsideration and rescinded the January 20, 2016 Order, returning the matter to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

ANA OCHOA vs. MALIBU COLONY MAIDS, INC.

In this case, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration filed by the self-represented applicant, and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The petition sought reconsideration of a non-final order and was dismissed as it could only be taken from a “final” order. The Board granted the petition to the extent it sought removal, rescinded the part of the WCJ’s minute orders of February 24, 2016 that took this matter off calendar, and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings.

VALENTE MARTINEZ vs. MESA VERDE PARTNERS DBA COSTA MESA COUNTRY CLUB; Administered By AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

This case involves a lien claimant, Edward Kornberg, D.C. aka Kornberg Chiropractic, who is seeking reconsideration of a workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (WCJ) Findings and Award issued February 1, 2016. The WCJ found that applicant Valente Martinez was reasonably required to receive the treatment provided by lien claimant during the period August 17, 2011 through October 12, 2011, to be reimbursed pursuant to the Official Medical Fee Schedule. The lien claimant is seeking payment for all services rendered through his chiropractic practice beginning June 2, 2011, and including additional services beyond those identified in the WCJ’s Opinion and Decision. The defendant has filed an Answer to lien

DURAND MACKLIN vs. LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS; ATLANTA HAWKS; INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA; NEW YORK KNICKS

This case involves Durand Macklin, the applicant, and the Los Angeles Clippers, Atlanta Hawks, Insurance Company of North America, and New York Knicks, the defendants. The Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (Div. Five) remanded the matter to the Board for the purpose of making a supplemental award of reasonable attorney fees to the attorneys for the applicant. The Board awarded the requested amount of $8,640.00 for services rendered in connection with the defendant’s petition for writ of review.

HECTOR GONZALEZ vs. CARDINAL GLASS CO.; SENTRY INSURANCE

In this case, Hector Gonzalez filed a Petition for Reconsideration against Cardinal Glass Co. and Sentry Insurance, claiming that he was entitled to additional compensation for temporary disability. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the Petition for Reconsideration, finding that Gonzalez had not shown that there had been any “new and further” temporary disability following the April 20, 2013 Joint Findings, Award and Order as required by Labor Code section 5410. The Board also found that the report of Dr. Davies, dated April 1, 2015, was not substantial or persuasive evidence on the issue of temporary disability and did not support there was new and further temporary disability.

JULIA HERRERA DE GRADILLA vs. MERCHANTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE, Permissibly Self-Insured

ADJ9720533

In this case, Julia Herrera De Gradilla filed a petition for reconsideration with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) against Merchants Building Maintenance, which was deemed untimely. The WCAB dismissed the petition for reconsideration due to the fact that it was filed more than 25 days after the service of the arbitrator’s decision and beyond any extension of time that the petitioner might have been entitled to under WCAB Rule 10508.