Case law

Honeywell v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 179 · California Supreme Court · Feb 10, 2005

(Varela v. Board of Police Commissioners (1951) 107 Cal.App.2d 816, 822 [ 238 P.2d 62 ].) … J., Kennard, J., Baxter, J., Chin, J., Brown, J., and Moreno, J., concurred. 1 All further statutory references are to the Labor Code unless otherwise specified. 2 Section 3208.3, subdivision (h) provides: “No compensation

Magit v. Board of Medical Examiners

57 Cal. 2d 74 · California Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1961

(See Martin v. Alcoholic Beverage etc. Appeals Board, 52 Cal.2d 287, 293 [ 341 P.2d 296 ] ; Bonham v. … Bonham v. McConnell, 45 Cal.2d 304, 306 [ 288 P.2d 502 ] ; Cooper v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 35 Cal.2d 242, 252 [ 217 P.2d 630 , 18 A.L.R.2d 593 ].)

Place v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

3 Cal. 3d 372 · California Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1970

to determine whether the board’s conclusion was supported by substantial evidence” (LeVesque v. … Com. (1949) 90 Cal.App.2d 262, 265-266 [ 202 P.2d 585 ]; Brown v. Indus-rial Acc. Com. (1941) 44 Cal.App,2d 6, 12 [ 111 P.2d 931 ]; Hendricks v. Industrial Acc.

LeBoeuf v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

34 Cal. 3d 234 · California Supreme Court · Aug 8, 1983

(Pullman Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (1946) 28 Cal.2d 379, 388 [ 170 P.2d 10 ]; Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Indus.A.C. (1936) 6 Cal.2d 314, 316 [ 57 P.2d 501 ]; Bartlett Hayward Co. v. Indus. Acc. … Moyer v. Workmen’s Comp.

Redner v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

5 Cal. 3d 83 · California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1971

As this court observed in French v. Rishell (1953) 40 Cal.2d 477, 481 [ 254 P.2d 26 ], the board “from its early days, has” been “allowed to receive hearsay evidence and to proceed informally. . . .” (See Bland v. … Courts have held that the board may not rely on medical reports . . . based upon inadequate medical history or examinations (West v. Industrial Acc.

Lamb v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

11 Cal. 3d 274 · California Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1974

(Lundberg v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd., 69 Cal.2d 436 , 439 . . . .) This rule is binding upon the board and this court. (Id. at p. 439.)” (Garza v. Workmen’s Comp. App. … “As a general rule, the board ‘must accept as true the intended meaning of [evidence] both uncontradicted and unimpeached.’ (LeVesque v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd., supra, 1 Cal.3d 627, 639 ; McAllister v. Workmen’s Comp.

Gibson v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

9 Cal. 3d 494 · California Supreme Court · May 22, 1973

Portland Cement Co. v. Cal. Unemp. Ins. … Portland Cement Co. v. Cal. Unemp. Ins.

Koehn v. State Board of Equalization

50 Cal. 2d 432 · California Supreme Court · Jun 4, 1958

(See Hidalgo v. … United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v.

Cumero v. Public Employment Relations Board

49 Cal. 3d 575 · California Supreme Court · Sep 7, 1989

To the *595 contrary, the constitutional limitations laid down in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, supra, 431 U.S. 209 , and Ellis v. … Citing Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, supra, 431 U.S. 209, 239-240, fn. 40 [ 52 L.Ed.2d 261, 287, fn. 40 ], and Railway Clerks v.

Pearson v. State Social Welfare Board

54 Cal. 2d 184 · California Supreme Court · May 20, 1960

State Social Welfare Board (Nov. 1959), 175 Cal.App.2d 614 [ 346 P.2d 808 ], and two unreported superior court decisions, Putnam v. State Social Welfare Board (June 1958), San Diego County No. 223,084, and Trujillo v. … (Newbold v. Social Welfare Board,, supra, 76 Cal.App.2d 844, 847 .)

Patterson v. Board of Supervisors

12 Cal. 105 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1859

matter to stay an Act of this nature, done in pursuance of legislative authority, and that the facts stated in the bill justify the action of the Court below, it is clear that, under the 'decision of this Court in Hutchinson v.

Board of Education v. Jack M.

19 Cal. 3d 691 · California Supreme Court · Jul 21, 1977

In Board of Trustees v. … (See Board of Trustees v.

Roe v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

12 Cal. 3d 884 · California Supreme Court · Nov 27, 1974

(Van Nuis v. Los Angeles Soap Co. (1973) 36 Cal.App.3d 222, 230 [ 111 Cal.Rptr. 398 ]; LaBorde v. McKesson & Robbins, Inc. (1968) 264 Cal.App.2d 363, 370 [ 70 Cal.Rptr. 726 ], approved in Brown v. … (Nelsen v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd., supra, 11 Cal.App.3d at p. 478 .) The appeals board has expressed doubt as to the delegation’s constitutionality. (See Corley v. Workmen’s Comp.

Wilkinson v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

19 Cal. 3d 491 · California Supreme Court · May 25, 1977

We sustain Wilkinson’s contention and annul the decision of the board. Under the doctrine established in Bauer v. … Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Board 1(1967) 67 Cal.2d 483 ( 62 Cal.Rptr. 757 , 432 P.2d 365 )]; De Luna v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Board [(1968) 258 Cal.App.2d 199 ( 65 Cal.Rptr. 421 )]; Miller v.

Patty v. Board of Medical Examiners

9 Cal. 3d 356 · California Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1973

Brown (Fla. 1951) 55 So.2d 334, 336 (injunction against unlawful practice of dentistry); Florida Board of Pharmacy v. … (Moran v. Board of Medical Examiners, supra, 32 Cal.2d 301, 308 ; see Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners, supra, 68 Cal.2d 67, 71-73 ; Merrill v.

Hinojosa v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

8 Cal. 3d 150 · California Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1972

The board rejected the argument of the referee that Smith v. Workmen's Comp. App. … Nor did the appeals board dispute this finding, but instead noted that “the referee in relying upon Smith v. Workmen's Comp. App.

Jones v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

68 Cal. 2d 476 · California Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1968

(See Foster v. I.A.C., 20 C.C.C. 276 [ 136 Cal.App.2d 812 ( 289 P.2d 253 )]).” … Co. v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Board (1966) 65 Cal.2d 429, 433 [ 55 Cal.Rptr. 248 , 421 P.2d 96 ].) We have also said that the W.C.A.B. is not entitled to rely on medical reports which it knows to be erroneous (McCoy v.

Ogdon v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

11 Cal. 3d 192 · California Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1974

Fund v. Ind. Acc. Com. … (Essex County Welfare Board v. Philpott, 59 N.J. 75 [ 279 A.2d 806 ].)

Sheehan v. Board of Police Commissioners

188 Cal. 525 · California Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1922

(Spencer v. City of Los Angeles, supra; Hartford etc. Co. v. Jordan, 168 Cal. 270 [ 142 Pac. 839 ]; Craig v. … (Citing Barber v. Mulford, supra.) In the recent case of Engebretson v.

Isobe v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

12 Cal. 3d 584 · California Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1974

(United States v. … (Id. at p. 255; see also Jordt v. State Board of Education (1939) 35 Cal.App.2d 591 [ 96 P.2d 809 ].)