Legal Opinion

Mendoza v. Brodeur

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 18, 2006No. A109303PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MARCHIANO, P. J.

This personal injury case involves the overlay of workers’ compensation law.

Defendant Glenn Brodeur hired plaintiff Ernesto Mendoza, an unlicensed roofer, to replace his roof. After a few hours on the job, plaintiff fell from the roof and was injured. Plaintiff contended that defendant did not provide workers’ compensation insurance. In plaintiff’s personal injury action, the trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff was not an employee under workers’ compensation law and plaintiff had not come forward with evidence…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Leal v. Holy Spirit Ass'n for Unification of World ChristianityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Brizuela v. Calfarm InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Blackwell v. VasilasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  2. Zaragoza v. IbarraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  3. Chin v. NamvarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  4. Vebr v. CulpCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  5. Jones v. Sorenson, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API