Case law

North American Rockwell Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

9 Cal. App. 3d 154 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 1970

We have reached the conclusion that the injury is compensable and the decision of the appeals board is correct. The pertinent facts, established by stipulation, are as follows. At 4 p.m. on October 16, 1968, Andrew H. … In finding the injury compensable, the appeals board relied on the general rule that injuries sustained by an employee while going to or from his place of work upon premises owned or controlled by his employer are deemed

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

5 Cal. Rptr. 3d 822 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 2003

Furthermore, once the Board determines to exercise its jurisdiction over a petition for reconsideration, this establishes that the order was “final.” (See Kosowski v. Workers’ Comp. … We decline to apply such a variable definition. 11 This appears to be the Board’s view as well. (See Curtis v. Workers’ Comp.

Citizens Against a New Jail v. Board of Supervisors

63 Cal. App. 3d 559 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 10, 1976

Hite, 36 Cal.2d 125 [ 222 P.2d 225 ]; Mueller v. Brown, 221 Cal.App.2d 319 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 474 ]). … Board of Supervisors, 176 Cal. 84 [ 167 P. 514 ] [overruled on other grounds in Simpson v. Hite, supra, at pp. 132-133 ]; see Burdick v.

San Joaquin Agricultural Corp. v. Board of Supervisors

121 Cal. App. 468 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 8, 1932

The validity of the order of the Board of Supervisors denying petitioner’s application for exclusion of lands. … The first objection presented by the appellants covers precisely the questions presented and considered by this court in the case of Miller & Lux, Inc., a Corporation, v.

Southern California Freight Lines v. State Board of Equalization

72 Cal. App. 2d 26 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 4, 1945

More nearly in point are such cases as Buick Motor Co. v. … As in Boessow v.

Bar Master, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization

65 Cal. App. 3d 408 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 28, 1976

Bar Master, Inc. sued State Board of Equalization (Board) for a refund of use taxes paid by it pursuant to deficiency assessment by the Board following the Board’s denial of claim for refund. … See also Culligan Water Conditionings v.

Anderson-Cottonwood Disposal Service v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

135 Cal. App. 3d 326 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 25, 1982

Since the employer is not a joint tortfeasor, Witt v. Jackson does not apply. (Ruiz, at pp. 469-470.) The board properly declined to apply Ruiz for it is no longer the law. … We assume arguendo the identical issue of employer negligence was presented in Webb’s civil action and the board proceedings. (See Jackson v.

Lawrence Drasin & Associates v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

3 Cal. App. 4th 1564 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1992

In Goler v. … Beloud, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 50 Cal.App.3d at p. 737 .) The Board asserts it is uncertain to what extent Mr.

3 Stonedeggs, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

California Court of Appeal · May 10, 2024

ADJ14015513) v. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD AND BRADEN NANEZ, Respondents. … In contrast, the Board in Norman v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1997) 62 Cal.Comp.Cases 87 [1997 Cal.Wrk.Comp.

Engs Motor Truck Co. v. State Board of Equalization

189 Cal. App. 3d 1458 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 11, 1987

(Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 [ 335 P.2d 672 ], italics added; see also People v. … (Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal., supra, 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 ; Coast Elevator Co. v.

Skip Fordyce, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

149 Cal. App. 3d 915 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 14, 1983

Butcher v. Thornhill (1936) 14 Cal.App.2d 149, 152 [ 58 P.2d 179 ].) Judging the probabilities with respect to the evidence is entirely within the province of the board. … Co. v. Southern P.

California Trout, Inc. v. State Water Resources Control Board

207 Cal. App. 3d 585 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 26, 1989

(Mahon v. Safeco Title Ins. … (See e.g., Tulare Dist. v.

Board of Parole Hearings v. Superior Court

170 Cal. App. 4th 104 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2008

The limited stay did not preclude the Board from conducting the parole suitability hearing scheduled for August 20, 2008. By the same order, pursuant to Palma v. U.S. … California Code of Regulations governs. 6 The factors that tend to show unsuitability for parole are (1) the commitment offense was carried out in an “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel manner,” (2) a “[previous [rjecord of [v]

Kirby v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

47 Cal. App. 3d 852 · California Court of Appeal · May 1, 1975

The board erred. … Brown (H. G), J., and Scótt, X, concurred.

Soper-Wheeler Co. v. State Board of Equalization

124 Cal. App. 3d 913 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 23, 1981

It is the board’s application of this formula which is at issue. … (Lockhart v. Wolden (1941) 17 Cal.2d 628, 631 [ 111 P.2d 319 ].) The language of section 434.5, subdivision (f) is clear that the immediate harvest value is to be averaged for 20 quarters.

John Deere Co. v. Franchise Tax Board

237 Cal. App. 2d 663 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 25, 1965

In 1951, the Supreme Court denied recovery of taxes paid under protest for the income year 1937 (John Deere Plow Co. v. … Franchise Tax Board, 38 Cal.2d 214 [ 238 P.2d 569 ], app. dism. 343 U.S. 939 [ 72 S.Ct. 1036 , 96 L.Ed. 1345 ]).

California Motor Express, Ltd. v. State Board of Equalization

133 Cal. App. 2d 237 · California Court of Appeal · May 25, 1955

(Coca-Cola Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 25 Cal.2d 918, 922 [ 156 P.2d 1 ] ; Universal Eng. Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 118 Cal.App.2d 36, 43 [ 256 P.2d 1059 ].) … Failure of any interested party to challenge the board’s construction over many years is a factor entitled to much weight. “Not lightly vacated is the verdict of quiescent years.” (Cardozo, J., in Coler v.

Harris v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

204 Cal. App. 2d 729 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 18, 1962

From this decision licensees appealed to the appeals board of the department, which reversed the department’s decision. … (McKay Jewelers, Inc. v. Bowron, 19 Cal.2d 595 [ 122 P.2d 543 , 139 A.L.R. 1188 ]; Serve Yourself Gas etc. Assn. v. Brock, 39 Cal.2d 813 [ 249 P.2d 545 ].)

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 467 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 9, 2004

According to the Board “the downsizing of [Bryan’s] employer . . . … A dissenting board member disagreed. He thought Dr.

Agricultural Labor Relations Board v. Superior Court of Sacramento County

4 Cal. App. 5th 675 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 25, 2016

(Roberts v. … NLRB v. Electro-Voice (N.D.