Case law

Corley v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

22 Cal. App. 3d 447 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 1971

In view of Labor Code section 3859, requiring the consent of both employer and employee to third party settlement (but see Brown v. … (Brown v. Southern Ry. Co., 204 N.C. 668 [ 169 S.E. 419 ]), and “[I]t is contrary to the policy of the law for the employee, or his subrogee, the insurance carrier, to benefit by the wrong of the employer.” (Lovette v.

Moore v. State Board of Control

112 Cal. App. 4th 371 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 2003

(DiGenova v. State Board of Education (1962) 57 Cal.2d 167, 176 [ 18 Cal.Rptr. 369 , 367 P.2d 865 ].) … (Barker v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 42, 48 [ 105 Cal.Rptr.2d 531 ]; Carr v. State of California (1976) 58 Cal.App.3d 139, 147 [ 129 Cal.Rptr. 730 ]; Singer Co. v.

Muething v. Franchise Tax Board

52 Cal. App. 4th 275 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 1997

The Franchise Tax Board (Tax Board) denied the refund claims with respect to some of the tax years and issued a refund for other tax years, but then reversed the refunds by issuing notices of assessment. … Thus, this is the sort of transaction described in Commissioner v.

Bohannon v. Board of Medical Examiners

24 Cal. App. 215 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 31, 1914

Again in Hellman v. … In State v. Board of Dental Examiners, 31 Wash. 492 , [ 72 Pac. 110 ], the question presented related to the practice of dentistry, but the principle is the same.

Cooper v. Board of Medical Examiners

49 Cal. App. 3d 931 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 18, 1975

(Brown v. Cohn (1974) 11 Cal.3d 639, 646-647 [ 114 Cal.Rptr. 128 , 522 P.2d 688 ].) … (Brown v.

D'Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners

6 Cal. App. 3d 716 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 17, 1970

The college went to court in College of Osteopathic Physicians & Surgeons v. Board of Medical Examiners (1921) 53 Cal.App. 138, 139 [ 199 P. 1093 ]. … (Coca-Cola Co. v. State Board of Equalization (1945) 25 Cal.2d 918, 921 [ 156 P.2d 1 ]; Michels v. Watson (1964) 229 Cal.App.2d 404, 409 [ 40 Cal.Rptr. 464 ].)

Doyle v. Board of Barber Examiners

219 Cal. App. 2d 504 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 21, 1963

(Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353 U.S. 232, 238-239 [ 77 S.Ct. 752 , 1 L.Ed.2d 796, 801-802 , 64 A.L.R.2d 288 ]; Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 41 [ 36 S.Ct. 7 , 60 L.Ed. 131, 135 ]; Bautista v. … (State Board of Dry Cleaners v. Thrift-D-Lux Cleaners, 40 Cal.2d 436, 443 [ 254 P.2d 29 ].) The law must not be arbitrary; it must rest upon “adequate reason.” (State Board of Dry Cleaners v.

Ennis Brown Co. v. W. S. Hurst & Co.

1 Cal. App. 752 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1905

In the case of Wolf v. … (Maionchi v. Nicholini, ante, p. 690, [ 82 Pac. 1052 ]; Lee v. Murphy, 119 Cal. 364 , [ 51 Pac. 549 ].)

Laucirica v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

17 Cal. App. 3d 681 · California Court of Appeal · May 19, 1971

Respondents cite a determination by the board itself (Jordan v. W.C.A.B., 32 Cal.Comp.Cases 308). … Brown (H. C.), J., and Caldecott, J., concurred.

Ramsey v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

2 Cal. App. 3d 693 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 16, 1969

The referee and the board found that respondents acted unreasonably in delaying and refusing payment of compensation. The board thus had no alternative but to impose the full penalty required by section 5814. (Vogh v. … (Davison v. Industrial Acc. Com., supra, 241 Cal.App.2d 15, 18 .) The board relied in part upon its decision in Roche v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc., 34 Cal. Comp. Cases 7 .

Gee v. California State Personnel Board

5 Cal. App. 3d 713 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 20, 1970

(Shepherd v. State Personnel Board, 48 Cal.2d 41, 46 [ 307 P.2d 4 ]; Tabory v. State Personnel Board, 208 Cal.App.2d 543, 545 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 333 ].) … (Orlandi v. State Personnel Board, 263 Cal.App.2d 32, 37 [ 69 Cal.Rptr. 177 ].) 3.

Orinda Assn. v. Board of Supervisors

182 Cal. App. 3d 1145 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1986

Assn. v. Board of Permit Appeals, supra, 66 Cal.2d at p. 779 .) … Assn. v. Board of Permit Appeals, supra, 66 Cal.2d at pp. 773-781.)

Smith v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 186 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 29, 2000

Fund v. Ind. Acc. Com. (1952) 38 Cal.2d 659, 665 [ 242 P.2d 311 ], italics omitted.) We disagree with the Board’s reasoning in Paul v. … (Blue Cross of California v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (1998) 63 Cal.Comp.Cases 431; writ den.)

Geffner v. Board of Psychology

California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 2024

(Land v. California Unemployment Ins. Appeals Board (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 127, 139; see also Cassidy v. … V.

Wightman v. Franchise Tax Board

202 Cal. App. 3d 966 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 12, 1988

(See Geftakys v. State Personnel Board (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 844, 867 [ 188 Cal.Rptr. 305 ]; see also Association for Retarded Citizens v. … (See Geftakys v. State Personnel Board, supra, 138 Cal.App.3d at p. 867 ; Association for Retarded Citizens v. Department of Developmental Services, supra, 38 Cal.3d at p. 390 .)

Hope v. Contractors' State License Board

228 Cal. App. 2d 414 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 10, 1964

(Moran v. Board of Medical Examiners, 32 Cal.2d 301 [ 196 P.2d 20 ]; Backman v. State of California, 167 Cal.App.2d 82 [ 333 P.2d 830 ]; Tabory v. … State Personnel Board, 208 Cal.App.2d 543 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 333 ]; Hutchinson v. Contractors’ State etc. Board, 143 Cal.App.2d 628 [ 300 P.2d 216 ].)

Foster v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

75 Cal. Rptr. 3d 272 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 17, 2008

The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of the WCJ’s award. … (Nolan v. City of Anaheim (2004) 33 Cal.4th 335, 340 [ 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 857 , 92 P.3d 350 ]; California Teachers Assn. v.

Johnstone v. State Board of Equalization

95 Cal. App. 2d 527 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 11, 1950

board, unless the board shall determine that the issuance of such licenses for other premises is warranted because of the public convenience and necessity.” … Paragraph four then confers the rule-making power on the board, and requires the board to restrict seasonal licenses in each county as the board “shall determine shall be in the interest of public welfare and morals, convenience

Slattery v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

60 Cal. App. 3d 245 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 19, 1976

of the parties.” (§ 1952; see also, Gibson v. … In Gibson v. Unemployment Ins.

Tisher v. California Horse Racing Board

231 Cal. App. 3d 349 · California Court of Appeal · May 31, 1991

Redding v. St. … Plaintiffs cite Rosner v.