Case law

Shope v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

21 Cal. App. 3d 774 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 2, 1971

The Board’s decision as to the insurance coverage thus comes before us *779 as a question of law. (Granco Steel, Inc. v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd., supra, 68 Cal.2d 191, 197 ; Cal-Nat Airways, Inc. v. Workmen’s Comp. … (McCary v. John Hancock etc. Life Ins. Co., supra.)

California Science Center v. State Personnel Board

218 Cal. App. 4th 1302 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 16, 2013

BS136681) v. STATE PERSONNEL BOARD, Defendant and Respondent; RUDY ARELLANES, Real Party in Interest and Appellant. … In Dyson v.

Molnar v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

57 Cal. App. 4th 1448 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 1997

Finally, Molnar relies on Social Security Board v. Nierotko (1946) 327 U.S. 358 [ 66 S.Ct. 637 , 90 L.Ed. 718 , 162 A.L.R. 1445 ] and Kerin v. Unemployment Ins. … (Social Security Board v. Nierotko, supra, 327 U.S. at pp. 364-365 [66 S.Ct. at pp. 640-641].)

Humburg v. Board of Police & Fire Commissioners

27 Cal. App. 6 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 20, 1915

We have, then, exactly the condition presented by Black v. Board of Police Commissioners, 17 Cal. App. 310 , [ 119 Pac. 674 ], Indeed, Mr. … The other cases cited by respondents to this point are: Barendt v. McCarthy, 160 Cal. 685 , [ 118 Pac. 228 ] ; Welch v. Ware, 161 Cal. 646 , [ 119 Pac. 1080 ] ; Ross v. Board of Education, 18 Cal.

Bowman v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

171 Cal. App. 2d 467 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1959

The respective powers of the department and the Appeals Board were defined by the Supreme Court in the recent case of Martin v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board, 52 Cal.2d 238 [ 340 P.2d 1 ]. … The views of the board were in striking contrast.

Santa Monica Rent Control Board v. Bluvshtein

230 Cal. App. 3d 308 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 1991

(City of Santa Monica v. Yarmark (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 153, 157 [ 249 Cal.Rptr. 732 ]; Javidzad v. City of Santa Monica (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 524, 526 [ 251 Cal.Rptr. 350 ].) *315 B. … (Nelson v. Nevel (1984) 154 Cal.App.3d 132, 142 [ 201 Cal.Rptr. 93 ].)

Selden v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

176 Cal. App. 3d 877 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 21, 1986

In its accompanying opinion the Board majority concluded that applicant’s reliance on Bland v. Workmen’s Comp. App. … Royster v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd. (1974) 40 Cal.App.3d 412, 414 [ 115 Cal.Rptr. 210 ].) Bland v. Workmen’s Comp. App.

Stewart v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance

80 Cal. App. 3d 172 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 21, 1978

Board of Dental Examiners (1975) 53 Cal.App.3d 283 [ 125 Cal.Rptr. 694 ]; see also Chapman v. Federal Power Comm’n. (1953) 345 U.S. 153 [ 97 L.Ed. 918 , 73 S.Ct. 609 ].) … (Furnish v. Board of Medical Examiners (1957) 149 Cal.App.2d 326, 331 [ 308 P.2d 924 ].) *184 Disposition The judgment (order granting the motion for a new trial) is affirmed.

Yavitch v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

142 Cal. App. 3d 64 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 20, 1983

“[W]here several courts have concurrent jurisdiction over a certain type of proceeding, the first one to assume and exercise such jurisdiction in a particular case acquires an exclusive jurisdiction. ” (Browne v. … (San Martin v. Superior Court, 169 Cal.App.2d 14, 19 [ 336 P.2d 618 ].) “In Young v.

Travelers Insurance v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

147 Cal. App. 3d 1033 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 12, 1983

(Foss v. … Code, tit. 16, § 745.) 3 Prior to seeking a writ of review in this court, petitioner sought and was denied reconsideration by the board. Petitioner’s petition was proper (Brunau v. Industrial Acc.

Ogden v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

153 Cal. App. 3d 786 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 1984

Opinion BROWN (G. A.), P. J. … In Urlwin v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 466 [ 178 Cal.Rptr. 758 ] the Board’s decision incorporated by reference parts of respondent’s petition for reconsideration.

Campbell v. Board of Civil Service Commissioners

76 Cal. App. 2d 399 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 8, 1946

(Campbell v. City of Los Angeles, 47 Cal.App.2d 310, 313 [ 117 P.2d 901 ] ; Heard v. Board of Administration etc. of City of Los Angeles, 39 Cal.App.2d 685, 695, 698 [ 104 P.2d 47 ] ; Pinion v. … State Personnel Board, 29 Cal.App.2d 314, 317, 319 [ 84 P.2d 185 ] ; Nash v. City of Los Angeles, 78 Cal.App. 516, 519, 520 [ 248 P. 689 ].)

Smith v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance

202 Cal. App. 3d 316 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 1988

Does this authority transform the Board’s proceedings into an adjudication? (See Hannah v. Larche, supra, 363 U.S. at pp. 440-441 [4 L.Ed.2d at. pp. 1320-1321]; Stanson v. … Although the concept of liberty is “broad indeed,” (Board of Regents v.

Mantel v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

37 Cal. App. 3d 739 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 6, 1974

In Zozaya v. Workmen’s Comp. … The appeals board having granted reconsideration must make the order, decision or award itself. (See Cal. Shipbuilding Corp. v. Ind. Acc. Com. (1946) 27 Cal.2d 536, 543-544 [ 165 P.2d 669 ]; and Argonaut Ins. Co. v.

Desert Turf Club v. Board of Supervisors

141 Cal. App. 2d 446 · California Court of Appeal · May 11, 1956

(Sandstrom v. California Horse Racing Board, 31 Cal.2d 401, 413 [ 189 P.2d 17 , 3 A.L.R.2d 90 ].) The opinion in Cunningham v. … Com., 170 Cal. 800, 801 [ 151 P. 423 ] ; Dyment v. Board of Medical Examiners, 93 Cal.App. 65 [ 268 P. 1073 ] ; Thrasher v.

Palmer v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

192 Cal. App. 3d 1241 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1987

The Board noted that in Smith v. … The Board noted that in Van Voorhis v. Workmen's Comp.

Reimel v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

256 Cal. App. 2d 158 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1967

(Select Base Materials v. Board of Equalization, 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 [ 335 P.2d 672 ]; Brown v. Cranston, 214 Cal.App.2d 660, 672 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 725 ].) … (County of Los Angeles v. Frisbie, 19 Cal.2d 634, 639 [ 122 P.2d 526 ] ; In re Kernan, 242 Cal.App.2d 488, 491 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 515 ] ; Brown v.

Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Board of Commissioners

276 Cal. App. 2d 221 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 18, 1969

See Hines v. … Brown, The Open Economy; Mr. Justice Frankfurter and The Position of the Judiciary, (1957) 219, 220, reprinted in Selected Essays on Constitutional Law (1963), p. 373.)

Boehm & Associates v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

90 Cal. Rptr. 2d 486 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 1999

Discussion The interpretation of a labor statute is a legal question which we review independently from the determination of the appeals board. (See *516 Rymer v. … For this proposition, State Fund offers only an opinion of the appeals board—Sharma v. CNA Cas. of Calif. (1993) OAK 195740, 22 Cal. Workers’ Comp. Rptr. 18.

City of Palmdale v. Board of Equalization

206 Cal. App. 4th 329 · California Court of Appeal · May 23, 2012

On February 19, 2010, eight cities and one redevelopment agency filed a third petition against the Board (City of Alhambra v. State Board of Equalization (Super. Ct. L.A. County, 2011, No. … (See Hardisty v. Hinton & Alfert, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at p. 1007 .)