Legal Opinion

Barr v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 23, 2008No. C054907. No. C057303PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RAYE, J.

The dispositive issue presented by these consolidated petitions for review is whether the authority of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) to award costs for the preparation of a vocational rehabilitation consultant’s report depends on the report’s admissibility as evidence under Labor Code section 5703. The workers’ compensation judge denied applicant Jim Barr’s costs because he found the report was inadmissible. The WCAB affirmed. A different judge, however, determined the expense of a report prepared by the same consultant for applicant Bradley Dorigo was…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Carstens v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Olson v. Automobile Club of Southern CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Gee v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  5. County of Orange v. BARRATT AMERICAN, INC.California Court of Appeal · 2007

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API