What is the Workers’ Compensation Act?

Useful Resources for Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA)

Recent Rulings on Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA)

226-250 of 10000 results

EDITH H. CARTINI, ET AL. VS NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Documents that evidence any policy and/or procedure used to evaluate customer requests for repurchase pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, from the date of purchase to the present. 2. Document Production The Court finds Plaintiff’s document requests to be overly broad and unduly burdensome. As such, the Court issues the following discovery order: Repair orders and invoices concerning the subject vehicle.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CONDOR MANAGEMENT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS REDIGER INVESTMENT MORTGAGE FUND, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP, ET AL.

Ratification is the subsequent adoption by one claiming the benefits of an act, which without authority, another has voluntarily done while ostensibly acting as the agent of him who affirms the act and who had the power to confer authority. (Reusche v. California Pacific Title Ins. Co. (1965) 231 Cal.App.2d 731, 737.) A party may adopt his signature written by another person, as valid and binding by subsequent approval or ratification, even though the signature was originally forged. (Volandri v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JOSE DE ANDA VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

Plaintiff filed for Worker’s Compensation in October 2014. Dr. Arnold L. Gilberg (Gilberg), whom Plaintiff saw in connection with the proceeding, provided a report to DWP in October 2016 which stated that Plaintiff “should be moved to another department. If this does not occur the same problems will evolve.” Plaintiff began seeking reasonable accommodations at DWP for his work restrictions in early 2017.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

JOSE MUNOZ ET AL VS SBI INDUSTRIES INC ET AL

On June 8, 2018, Nordstrom, Inc. filed a complaint-in-intervention against SDI Industries, Inc. and Intelligrated Sytems, LLC for recovery of paid WorkersCompensation benefits. On September 12, 2018, Plaintiffs substituted in Intelligrated Sytems, LLC for Doe 1. On November 1, 2018, Intelligrated Sytems, LLC filed a cross-complaint for indemnity and declaratory relief against SDI Industries. On December 10, 2018, SDI Industries filed a partial dismissal of it’s cross-complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

JOSHUA BROWN VS. CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

NOTICE: If oral arguments are requested or appearances are required, the hearing will be conducted remotely via Zoom [which includes telephonic and teleconferencing options]. No in person or Court Call appearances will be permitted. You must use your first and last name on your Zoom account so the court can positively identify you. The Department 4...

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

IN RE THE ESTATE OF GERALD E. ROBERTS, DECEASED

First and Final Account of Executor and Petition for Payment of Executors Statutory Compensation, For Statutory Compensation, Costs Advanced and Closing Costs to Attorneys For Executor and For Final Distribution PREGRANT ORDER The courtroom will be open on January 13, 2021. However, because of emergency orders and public health directives due to the COVID-19 pandemic, neither counsel nor petitioner need appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

TRANSCON FINANCIAL, INC. VS REID & HELLYER, APC

Because his partnership and the profit-sharing compensation are covered by the Senior Attorney Employment Agreement (Decl. of Kerbs, Ex. A, Section 6), these claims also arise out of the Employment Agreement and are subject to the arbitration provision.1 Plaintiff argues that the Arbitration Agreement should not be enforced because it is unconscionable.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

IN RE THE ESTATE OF ANN MARIE DENIS, DECEASED

Petition for Final Distribution, Waiver of Account, Allowance of Compensation to Administrator and Attorneys For Statutory and Extraordinary Services, Allowance of Reimbursement of Expenses of Administrator and Attorneys, For Reserve, and for Allocation of Estates PREGRANT ORDER The courtroom will be open on January 13, 2021. However, because of emergency orders and public health directives due to the COVID-19 pandemic, neither counsel nor petitioner need appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

MEENA ZAREH M D VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Act against USC; and (7) violation of Civil Code, § 52.4 against Cortes.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

LOUIS GIORDANO VS FORD MOTOR COMPANY

Plaintiff’s Complaint, filed April 30, 2018 alleges the following causes of action: (1) violation of the Song-Beverly Act – Breach of Express Warranty, (2) violation of the Song-Beverly Act – Breach of Implied Warranty, (3) violation of the Song-Beverly Act section 1793.2. On March 5, 2020, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement indicating that a conditional settlement had been reached in this action and a request for dismissal would be filed no later than July 4, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

NINETTA CAVALLO, ET AL. VS AAA ASSISTED LIVING ELDER CARE, LLC

“[P]unitive damages cannot be awarded against a corporation for conduct of an employee unless a corporate officer, director, or managing agent had knowledge of the employee's unfitness and disregarded the rights of others (or authorized/ratified the conduct or committed the act of oppression).” (Myers v. Trendwest Resorts, Inc. (2007) 148 Cal. App. 4th 1403, 1436.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

YOLANDA M. KIRTLAND, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED VS PENHALL COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA

“[A] presumption of fairness exists where: (1) the settlement is reached through arm’s-length bargaining; (2) investigation and discovery are sufficient to allow counsel and the court to act intelligently; (3) counsel is experienced in similar litigation; and (4) the percentage of objectors is small.” ((Id. at p. 245.) “[T]he test is not the maximum amount plaintiffs might have obtained at trial on the complaint, but rather whether the settlement is reasonable under all of the circumstances.”

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

JORGE ORTIZ VS SMART & FINAL STORES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

Plaintiff, by bringing a disability discrimination claim and alleging physical disability, has tendered this issue in the case, making discovery available.[2] Defendants finally contend that medical records produced in the workers compensation action show Plaintiff, in response to questionnaires, indicating that he suffered from mild to moderate depression. (Opposition at pp. 7–8.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

JOSE LUIS SERRANO VS FOREST LAWN MEMORIAL-PARK ASSOCIATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

II.FACTUAL BACKGROUND On January 23, 2017, Plaintiff attended the funeral of his brother-in-law’s stepfather and volunteered to act as a pallbearer. (Defendants’ Undisputed Material Fact (“UMF”) No. 1.) He and five other pallbearers were directed to carry the casket from the hearse and to the gravesite, which was located up a grassy slope. (UMF No. 3.) It was raining that day and the grass was wet. (UMF Nos. 4-6.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KHOSROW ARFAEI AZAD VS. EMILY BORGES

The Court finds good cause for continuance based on the stipulation and the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on defendants, who are classified as essential workers, and on the Court's calendar. The January 20, 2021 MSC and the March 8, 2021 trial dates are vacated. Given the length of the continuance requested, this case is referred to the COVID-19 Trial Setting Process ("TSP") for selection of Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference dates.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

LIDIA S. PAREDES VS TRINITY FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC

Violation of CA Bus & Prof Code § 17200 (7th Cause of Action) The Unfair Business Practices Act shall include “any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice.” (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200.) A plaintiff alleging unfair business practices under these statutes must state with reasonable particularity the facts supporting the statutory elements of the violation. (Khoury v. Maly's of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 619.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JOSE ESTRADA VS HOME DEPOT U.S.A.,INC.A DELAWARE CORPORATION

ANALYSIS: Plaintiff Jose Estrada (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (“the Unruh Act”) against Defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Defendant”) on May 8, 2019. Defendant filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication against Plaintiff on October 30, 2020. Plaintiff filed an opposition on December 30, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

TIFFANIE T. KENNEDY VS USA, INC.

The allegation does not sufficiently state that it was Defendant Copart, Inc.’s wrongful act that converted Plaintiff’s personal property. It indicates that another person, who was not Defendant Copart, Inc.’s agent or employee, could have entered the facility and converted Plaintiff’s personal property. Therefore, the demurrer to the seventh cause of action is sustained without leave to amend.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GIOCONDA ESCORCIA VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Common Carrier Liability Except as otherwise provided by statute, “[a] public entity is not liable for an injury, whether such injury arises out of an act or omission of the public entity or a public employee or any other person.” (Gov. Code § 815(a).) “[T]his section ‘abolished all common law or judicially declared forms of liability for public entities, except for such liability as may be required by the federal or state Constitution.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ALBERTO VARGAS ET AL VS CITY OF LONG BEACH

Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Defendant alleging causes of action for: (1) violations of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Retaliation) and (2) whistleblower retaliation pursuant to California Labor Code, Section 1102.5. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS IN LIMINE Motion No. 1: Grant Motion No. 2: Grant Motion No. 3: Grant Motion No. 4: Grant, conditioned upon the Court’s review prior to trial of the proposed redacted version of the order which Defendant proposes to introduce into evidence.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

RICHARD EUSEY VS SILVANA SZPOGANICZ

“[T]he act of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated may constitute an act of ‘malice’ under [Civil Code] §3294 if performed under circumstances which disclose a conscious disregard of the probable dangerous consequences.” (Taylor v. Superior Court (1979) 24 Cal. 3d 890, 892.) Plaintiff must allege something more, which he fails to do. Therefore, the prayer for punitive damages and all related allegations except one are struck from the complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

EDWARD KYLE VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

On August 26, 2019, Plaintiff brought his complaint against Defendant for: (1) retaliation in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and (2) retaliation in violation of California Labor Code section 1102.5. Defendant now seeks to enforce two deposition subpoenas for production of business records to Kohan Foundation (“Kohan”) and Jane Winslow, M.A. (“Winslow”).

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

KITCHEN RESOURCE INC., VS FRANCIS YESSENIA PADILLA, ET AL.

It therefore cannot reasonably be said that Plaintiff is without an adequate remedy at law and that damages would be insufficient as Plaintiff is capable of ascertaining the amount of compensation which would afford adequate relief. Additionally, Plaintiff fails to distinguish the instant non-solicitation clause from the non-solicitation clause in The Retirement Group, which the Court of Appeal found was unenforceable by way of injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SEPULVEDA INVESTMENT SERVICES VS. SUZANNE E. BUTLER

However, this sum will act as a credit to any sanctions which are owed to moving party by Defendants. Plaintiff contends that nearly $20,000 of sanctions and attorneys’ fees are currently owed to them. Therefore, the motion to amend and/or augment expert designation is granted. Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ERICK ALFRED RUBALCAVA, ET AL. VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.

In the case of a latent defect, a product is rendered unmerchantable, and the warranty of merchantability is breached, by the existence of the unseen defect, not by its subsequent discovery…’ The Song–Beverly Act does not include its own statute of limitations.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  « first    1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 400     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.