What are Cal/OSHA health and safety regulations?

Useful Rulings on Health and Safety Regulations – Cal/OSHA

Recent Rulings on Health and Safety Regulations – Cal/OSHA

CHAWONDA WASHINGTON VS DAVITA, INC. ET AL

Plaintiff Washington prioritized patient safety above all, but other employees did not appear similarly concerned with patient safety and health. (Complaint, ¶¶15 – 16.) Plaintiff Washington noticed that patients at the Tully Dialysis Center were improperly scheduled back-to-back and without the allotted 15-30 minute turnover time. (Complaint, ¶17.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

ROVERE V. PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD DBA CALTRAIN

Airways moved for summary judgment based on the Privette doctrine, and, in opposition, SeaBright and the employee presented “a declaration by an accident reconstruction expert, who stated that the lack of safety guards at ‘nip points’ on the conveyor violated Cal-OSHA regulations… and that the safety guards would have prevented Verdon’s injury.” (Id. at p.595.) U.S.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

ISAAC ESCOBAR V. QUINN LIFT, INC., ET AL.

(Direct Relief), was injured on August 10, 2017, as a result of Direct Relief’s violating multiple Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and other statutes. (FAC, ¶ GN-1.) Direct Relief was cited for failing to have two people at the warehouse at all times while employees were performing work but stating in its records that two employees were working together. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

HAROLD FIGUEROA ET AL VS AT&T CORPORATION ET AL

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this paragraph, Contractor agrees to perform all Work and furnish tools and equipment that comply with known safety regulations, practices, and precautions, including, but not limited to, regulations under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, as amended, or regulations of any Federal, State or local authorities. (DUMF 52.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

NATIONAL RETAIL TRANSPORTATION, INC. VS OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD, AN AGENCY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

The Board and the Division The Division has primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 (“CalOSHA”). §6300 et seq. The Division inspects workplaces and issues citations for violations of the safety orders adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board. §§ 142, 6307, 6308 et seq.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

JOSE DE JESUS DIAZ MATA ET AL VS NEWHALL UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST

, but not limited to, CAL-OSHA requirements…” (emphasis added) (See Ex.A to Lundgren Decl., Ex.B, p.B-1, I(a)(4)).

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SHIMMICK CONTRUCTION CO INC/OBAYASHI CORP A JOINT VENTURE VS. CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD

., A JOINT VENTURE, Petitioner, CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD, Respondent, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH, Real Party in Interest. Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Writ of Mandate - Tentative Ruling * * If oral argument is requested, it will be conducted remotelv through the Zoom application and live-streamed on the court's YouTube page.

  • Hearing

    May 26, 2020

SHIMMICK CONTRUCTION CO INC/OBAYASHI CORP A JOINT VENTURE VS. CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD

CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD, Respondent, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH, Real Party in Interest. Nature of Proceedings: Petition for Writ of Mandate – Tentative Ruling ** If oral argument is requested, it will be conducted remotely through the Zoom application and live-streamed on the court’s YouTube page.

  • Hearing

    May 26, 2020

ANDREWS VS TRI-CITY MEDICAL CENTER ASC

Plaintiff testifies that she filed a complaint with OSHA and spoke with representatives from San Diego County. Id. at ¶¶ 14, 34. Plaintiff also testifies that she threatened to go to the media about her perception that TCHD was violating certain laws. Id. ¶ 31; Andrews Depo. 204:10-207:7. There is a triable issue of fact as to whether TCHD knew about the OSHA complaint. Compare Andrews Decl., ¶ 34 with Beverly Depo., 58:18-22.

  • Hearing

    Mar 12, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

MORALES VS. TORRES GENERAL INC.

Plaintiff also claims that the “nondelegable duty” exception applies because Defendants breached a nondelegable duty to comply with numerous safety regulations, including CCR Title 8 Subchapter 4 Construction Safety Orders Article 3 General § 1509, that affirmatively contributed to Plaintiff’s injuries. But these OSHA regulations are not nondelegable. (See SeaBright Ins. Co. v. US Airways, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 590, 594; Delgadillo v. Television Ctr., Inc., (2018) 20 Cal. App. 5th 1078, 1090-91.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 09, 2020

MORALES VS. TORRES GENERAL INC.

Plaintiff also claims that the “nondelegable duty” exception applies because Defendants breached a nondelegable duty to comply with numerous safety regulations, including CCR Title 8 Subchapter 4 Construction Safety Orders Article 3 General § 1509, that affirmatively contributed to Plaintiff’s injuries. But these OSHA regulations are not nondelegable. (See SeaBright Ins. Co. v. US Airways, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 590, 594; Delgadillo v. Television Ctr., Inc., (2018) 20 Cal. App. 5th 1078, 1090-91.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 09, 2020

STAFFING NETWORK HOLDINGS, L.L.C. VS DWELL HOME, INC. ET AL.

Provision of Tools: Dwell provided Intervenor with safety glasses, dust masks, resistant work gloves, back safety belt and earplugs for work. Siegle Decl., ¶ 6; Exh. 1; Salvador Depo, 91:15-19. Staffing Network provided gloves to Intervenor. Oppo Exh. 1, Salvador Depo, 91:10-14. In support of its assertion (Fact 18) that Dwell considered Intervenor to be its employee, Dwell offers Ms.

  • Hearing

    Mar 01, 2020

AMERICAN CLAIMS MANAGEMENT INC VS MEMOS SCAFFOLDING NORWALK

It argues jobsite safety was under Bernard’s control because Bernard’s had a statutory duty under Cal/OSHA regulations to maintain a safe worksite as the general contractor in this construction project. It argues (1) Bernards never explicitly or implicitly assigned its safety obligations to any of its subcontractors.

  • Hearing

    Feb 24, 2020

MIGUEL ANGEL CUEVA VS. PACIFIC AMERICAN FISH CO.

This section applies to “any oral or written complaint…with reference to employee safety or health” and has been interpreted to protect an employee “against discharge or discrimination for complaining in good faith about working conditions or practices which he reasonably believes to be unsafe, whether or not there exists at the time of the complaint an OSHA standard or order which is being violated.” (Hentzel v. Singer Co. (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 290, 299-300.)

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

RYAN KAUFMAN VS APEEL TECHNOLOGY INC

[SS #38] Per the National and California State Electrical Codes, OSHA, CFR 29, NFPA 70E and Cal-OSHA, the fenced area containing the high voltage, high power equipment should have been locked and should have had large, bold, colored warning signs, stating, “DANGER---HIGH VOLTAGE---KEEP OUT”. [SS #39] Prior to the incident, there were never any warnings signs placed on the gate or fence of the enclosure for the power feed area.

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

GOMEZ V. HOLLANDER

The complaint alleges—albeit through the Cal-OSHA alleged findings—that the defendants, not the contractor, removed the safety barriers and therefore bore responsibility for the fall, and death, of the contractor’s worker. (See ¶13, Complaint, 4:10-15.) The facts underlying this death need to be fleshed out before the court may determine whether Privette applies. Motion to Strike The motion of the defendants to strike portions of the complaint is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2020

ABED DUBESTER VS AMPAM PARKS MECHANICAL, INC., ET AL.

and Health Act (“OSHA”) (and all amendments thereto); the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (“COBRA”) (and all amendments thereto); and any and all claims under federal, state, and local laws against discrimination.

  • Hearing

    Jan 24, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

PATRICIA J QUIJANO ET AL VS RODDY KHATIB ET AL

In Opposition, Plaintiffs proffer a Police Report indicating that Decedent died of “unknown circumstances”, an OSHA Report indicating that Decedent was found lying in a man-made ditch, and the Deposition testimony of Decedent’s wife indicating that Decedent told her that he smelled a strong smell of gas and was feeling sleepy before he died. (Abrahamian Decl., Exs. 2, 4, and 10.) Plaintiffs have provided no medical expert testimony to rebut Dr.

  • Hearing

    Jan 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KARLA , INDIVIDUALLY & AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM OF OSCAR JOVANI MIRANDA AND VALERIA A. MIRANDA MIRANDA VS 7 STAR LOGISTICS, INC

What is “it” and what portion of Cal-OSHA regulations were violated?) Plaintiffs allege “unlicensed, uncertified, and untrained” individuals were allowed to operate forklifts.

  • Hearing

    Jan 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

NORM WILSON & SONS, INC. VS CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD, ET AL.

Authority of Respondent Board and Real Party-in-Interest Division The Division has primary responsibility for administering and enforcing the California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 (“Act”), §6300 et seq. The Division inspects workplaces and issues citations for violations of the safety orders adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board. §§ 142, 6307, 6308 et seq.

  • Hearing

    Jan 14, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CDWR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CASES

Please see the Consolidate Tentative ruling posted under North Delta Water Agency's Motion for Attorney's Fees...

  • Hearing

    Jan 09, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CDWR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CASES

California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, California Water Impact Network, AquAlliance, Friends of the River, Sierra Club California, Restore the Delta, Planning and Conservation League, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of Stone Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, Save Our Sandhill Cranes, Center for Food Safety - petitioners in Sacramento Superior Court No. 34-2017-80002674 and answering parties in Sacramento Superior Court No. 34-2017-00215965.

  • Hearing

    Jan 09, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CDWR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CASES

Please see the Consolidate Tentative ruling posted under North Delta Water Agency's Motion for Attorney's Fees...

  • Hearing

    Jan 09, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CALIFORNIA HOTEL & LODGING ASSOCIATION VS CITY OF LONG BEACH

The court found that even if the promotion of health and safety was one of the city's purposes in passing the ordinance, that did not make it automatically preempted; it was only a factor in a nuanced inquiry into whether the effect of the ordinance would regulate a field that the state had reserved to itself. Id. at 190.

  • Hearing

    Jan 08, 2020

VARGAS, ET AL. V. LEVEL 10 CONSTRUCTION, L.P., ET AL.

Airways moved for summary judgment based on the Privette doctrine, and, in opposition, SeaBright and the employee presented “a declaration by an accident reconstruction expert, who stated that the lack of safety guards at ‘nip points’ on the conveyor violated Cal- OSHA regulations… and that the safety guards would have prevented Verdon’s injury.” (Id. at p.595.) U.S.

  • Hearing

    Dec 19, 2019

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.