Pinkerton, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EPSTEIN, Acting P. J.
Pinkerton, Inc., 1 seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Board) denying its petition for reconsideration and affirming an award in favor of Tinishia Samuel. Pinkerton contends that it gave sufficient notice of change of the primary treating physician. While the statute and regulation are not clear as to what notice is required, we conclude there was no proper notice in this case. We affirm the Board’s order.
Samuel asks that we order Pinkerton to pay her attorney’s fees and costs incurred in responding to its petition.
Based on our…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ralphs Grocery Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Industrial Indemnity Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Cannon v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Tenet/Centinela Hospital Medical Center v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Keulen v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.California Court of Appeal · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Foster v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Gage v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- State Compensation Ins. Fund v. WCABCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006