Home/Case Law/BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY
Regular DecisionWorkers' Compensation

BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY

Filed: Oct 17, 2017
Oakland
ADJ10526250

CompFox AI Summary

The Appeals Board affirmed a stipulated award where the applicant settled a claim for a 2005 injury for $7,500. CIGA argued that this settlement improperly impacted its potential recovery for a 2008 injury, claiming benefits it paid were actually due to the earlier injury and that Virginia Surety was other insurance. However, the Board found CIGA failed to establish joint and several liability between CIGA and Virginia Surety for the benefits at issue. The settlement itself does not alter CIGA's burden to prove such liability to seek reimbursement from Virginia Surety.

BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY is a workers' compensation case decided in Oakland. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.

It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Oakland.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

The Appeals Board affirmed a stipulated award where the applicant settled a claim for a 2005 injury for $7,500. CIGA argued that this settlement improperly impacted its potential recovery for a 2008 injury, claiming benefits it paid were actually due to the earlier injury and that Virginia Surety was "other insurance." However, the Board found CIGA failed to establish joint and several liability between CIGA and Virginia Surety for the benefits at issue. The settlement itself does not alter CIGA's burden to prove such liability to seek reimbursement from Virginia Surety.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY workers compensation case in Oakland. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY case law summary from Oakland. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY Case Analysis

BARRY PRIES vs. LIVERMORE AUTO CENTER, MARKEL SERVICES OMAHA, HARVEY & MADDLING, INC., dba DUBLIN HONDA, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, SEDGWICK CMS for ULLICO CASUALTY COMPANY is a legal case related to workers' compensation in Oakland. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

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