Menu Close

Author: WorkCompAcademy

Court of Appeal Rules on WCAB Jurisdiction Over NBA Team

Durand Macklin claimed a CT injury as a result of his employment as a professional basketball player while employed by multiple NBA teams.

The WCJ concluded there was subject matter jurisdiction over Macklin’s claim because at least a portion of Macklin’s injury occurred within the state of California. The WCJ also said it had personal jurisdiction over the three NBA defendants (Atlanta Hawks, petitioner New York Knickerbockers, and Los Angeles Clippers). Each of the NBA defendants engaged in basketball business activities within California. The WCJ found injury to his back and elsewhere, and rejected defenses such as statute of limitations and laches. He was awarded 76 percent disability with no apportionment.

The Knickerbockers sought reconsideration claiming there was no subject matter jurisdiction to make the award. The WCAB affirmed the award. The Court of Appeal also affirmed in the published case of New York Knickerbockers v WCAB (Macklin).

On appeal, the Knickerbockers argued that Macklin’s one game in California as a New York Knick, in which he suffered no injury, was de minimis and therefore could not create a legitimate interest for California in his injuries. The team relied on this court’s decision in Federal Ins. Co. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 1116 (Johnson).

A dispositive factor here is that, unlike in Johnson, Macklin played for a California team for a portion of the period of the cumulative injury. That Macklin, while employed by petitioner and Atlanta, participated in seven games and additional practices – at least one lasting two and one-half hours in California – is a factor in determining whether the connection between his injury and California is sufficient to conclude that the application of California workers’ compensation law here is reasonable. Because of the employment by a California-based team, the court did not have to determine if the other activities in California are sufficient by themselves to make the application of California workers’ compensation law reasonable, although those activities are more than the one game that Johnson concluded was de minimis.

Claims Administrator Implicated in $1.5 Million NFL Fraud Case

A West Sacramento woman has pleaded guilty to wire fraud in a case that involved filing false workers’ compensation claims for a former National Football League player. Kimberly Jones, 40, entered the plea and agreed to submit to a restitution order of at least $1.5 million, according to a U.S. Attorney’s Office news release.

Court documents indicate that from September 2001 through August 2011, Jones was employed as a senior claims representative, or claims adjuster for a third-party administrator that managed, among other things, workers’ compensation claims in California on behalf of Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association Insurance Group, or PMA.

Jones’ co-defendant, Marcus Buckley, 42, of Weatherford, Texas, played professional football in the National Football League between 1993 and 1999 with the New York Giants. During this time, the Giants had workers’ compensation insurance coverage through PMA.

In 2006, Buckley filed a worker’s compensation claim against the Giants for cumulative stress injuries sustained while playing football, in part, in California. In November 2010, the claim was settled for $300,000.

After his claims had been settled, however, between late 2010 and June 2011, Buckley allegedly prepared and filed numerous additional requests for reimbursement under his closed claim. He prepared fictitious invoices and statements from medical providers for medical services purportedly provided to him and fictitious credit collection notices from collection agencies purportedly seeking payment from Buckley for past due medical bills. Buckley sent the fictitious invoices, statements, and credit collection letters to Jones who had checks made payable to Buckley. In total, Buckley received more than $1,588,000 to which he was not entitled.

Charges against Buckley are pending. Jones it to be sentenced January 7 2016 and faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, a fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss in the case, and a three-year term of supervised release. This case is the product of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Assistant United States Attorney Michael M. Beckwith is prosecuting the case.

Herbicide Litigation May Be Precursor to Comp Cancer Claims

A U.S. farm worker and a horticultural assistant have filed lawsuits claiming Monsanto Co.’s Roundup herbicide caused their cancers. According to the report in Reuters Health, the lawsuits come six months after the World Health Organization’s cancer research unit said it was classifying glyphosate, the active weed-killing ingredient in Roundup and other herbicides, as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

One suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on Sept. 22, names as plaintiff 58-year-old Enrique Rubio, a former farm worker in California, Texas and Oregon who over several years labored in fields of cucumbers, onions and other vegetable crops. His duties included spraying fields with Roundup and other pesticides before Rubio was diagnosed with bone cancer in 1995, the lawsuit states.

A separate lawsuit making similar claims was filed the same day in federal court in New York by Judi Fitzgerald, 64, who claims she was exposed in the 1990s to Roundup when she worked at a horticultural products company. Fitzgerald was diagnosed with leukemia in 2012.

Attorney Robin Greenwald, one of the attorneys who brought Rubio’s case, said on Tuesday that she expects more lawsuits to follow because Roundup is the most widely used herbicide in the world and the WHO cancer classification gives credence to long-held concerns about the chemical. “I believe there will be hundreds of lawsuits brought over time,” said Greenwald.

Monsanto spokeswoman Charla Lord said that the claims are without merit and that glyphosate is safe for humans when used as labeled. “Decades of experience within agriculture and regulatory reviews using the most extensive worldwide human health databases ever compiled on an agricultural product contradict the claims in the suit which will be vigorously defended.”

WHO scientists cited several studies showing cancer links to glyphosate, though Monsanto has said the findings are wrong. Since the WHO action, some product liability lawyers have been seeking out plaintiffs for potential class-action lawsuits over glyphosate, postings on legal websites show.

“Price Gouging” Drug Companies Face Increasing Political Pressure

The powerful pharmaceutical industry is doing its best to hold back the tide, but mounting public outrage over excessive pricing of both old and new drugs may prompt government intervention. The controversy is already playing out on the presidential campaign trail and on Capitol Hill where House Democrats are demanding Valeant Pharmaceuticals provide documentation to justify the soaring costs of its drugs.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign purchased ads in Iowa and New Hampshire this week on the topic of her role in forcing Turing Pharmaceuticals, to partially roll back massive price increases. Clinton accused the company’s 32-year old CEO, Martin Shkreli, of “price gouging” on Twitter.

Billionaire Donald Trump, the GOP presidential frontrunner, also jumped into the act, calling Shkreli a “spoiled brat” for boosting the cost of the drug, Daraprim, from $13.50 to $750 a pill.

Shkreli, a hedge fund manager, has become the new symbol of industry greed and insensitivity. He recently announced he would cut back the price, without saying by how much.

At one time critics focused much of their wrath on Gilead Sciences Inc., the California based pharmaceutical company that charged as much as $1,000 a pill for the new wonder drug Sovaldi for treating the potentially lethal Hepatitis-C virus. The cost of the drug blew a hole in the budgets of the Department of Veterans Affairs, Medicare and Medicaid and forced federal and state officials to ration the availability of the popular drug.

Now industry critics have two easy targets to choose from – including Turing and Valeant, a major firm that jacked up the price of two heart medicines three to six fold the same day it acquired the rights. In both cases, the companies weren’t marketing newly developed drugs, which may have cost tens of millions of dollars to develop but drugs that have been on the market for many decades – making it far more difficult to justify a huge increase in price.

All 18 Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform have asked the GOP chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), to subpoena Valeant and compel company officials to provide documents justifying its price increases, according to the Washington Post. Democrats want Shkreli and Michael Pearson, the Valeant CEO, to testify before the committee.

The company earlier this month refused to respond to a request from Democratic Rep. Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont to explain the decision to raise the prices of Nitropress, a drug used to treat congestive heart failure, and Isuprel, a drug used to treat irregular heart rhythms.

PhRMA, the prescription drug industry’s main lobbying arm, warned recently that proposals like those of Clinton and Sanders to cap skyrocketing drug costs “would restrict patients’ access to medicines, result in fewer new treatments for patients, cost countless jobs across the country and end our nation’s standing as the world leader in biomedical innovation.”

DA Says Uwaydah Defendants Fraud “Continue Today”

The Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office outlined the roles 11 co-defendants allegedly played in the operation of a medical fraud scheme that netted defendants hundreds of millions of dollars. The story in CBS News reports that prosecutors describe a sprawling fraud scheme where 11 of the 15 defendants “billed hundreds of millions of dollars in fraudulent insurance claims, mostly involving workers compensation, that ranged from billing for services never provided to fraudulent surgeries.” Fraudulent billings, prosecutors say, that “continue today.”

At least 15 defense attorneys packed Judge Kathleen Kennedy’s downtown Los Angeles courtroom for a bail hearing for the 15 alleged co-conspirators. Bailiffs had to deny access to many in the overflowed courtroom. Bail bondsmen filled the aisles, among them the Beverly Hills bail bondsmen to rappers including Snoop Dog and Dr. Dre, and Josh Herman, who assisted Park with bail that sprung her for the murder trial. At one point Judge Kennedy mused that she had half the sheriff’s department in her courtroom.

The prosecution set a bail schedule for each of the 11 defendants at close to or exceeding $20 million. The four defendants in the related indictment have bail ranging from $1 million to nearly $3 million. In Friday’s hearing, defense attorneys argued for bail reduction calling the schedule “astronomical” and “unfair.”

Former Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley has referred to as “non-traditional” organized crime. “It’s not La Cosa Nostra, instead it is organized criminals who are smart enough to take advantage of society’s weaknesses,” says Cooley. “These kinds of frauds are rampant and thoroughly penetrate the American health care system,” Cooley says. “Given the amount of money committed to health care in the United States, this is where the organized crime goes, it follows the money.”

Prosecutors contend that in 2009, Uwaydah’s fraud enterprise reached the stage that Uwaydah and other charged defendants including Park “conspired to take over a distressed bank… in order to facilitate the laundering of their criminal proceeds.”  Prosecutors accuse Park of controlling fraudulent billing practices for Uwaydah’s business empire, “placing her name on shell companies and shell bank accounts … designed to hide Uwaydah’s identity.” They also allege she attended weekly meetings with Uwaydah and other associates to discuss “hiding assets from creditors, insurance companies and law enforcement.”

At one point, the prosecution presented documents alleging that even last Tuesday, the very same day the 15 defendants were arraigned in court, the medical conspiracy still continued to churn out fraudulent medical billings and services while the alleged conspirators were in custody.

Jury Convicts San Quentin Worker For Comp Fraud

After a nearly month long trial, Hosea Morgan, a Vallejo resident and former San Quentin State Prison worker, was found guilty of five charges including several acts of fraud and grand theft related to a pair of worker’s compensation claims filed in 2009. According to the report in the Times Herald Online, jurors heard from numerous witnesses in the case that had involvement in processing his claims, and later, investigating and documenting his daily life while he collected money from the State Compensation Insurance Fund.

Morgan became a correctional officer in 1985, and later, a counselor in 1995 mainly typing and moving files. It was during his time as correctional officer, he told an internal affairs investigator, that altercations were almost daily. Even later in his career as a counselor, altercations were “irregular, but frequent.” What was missing from these claims, investigators testified, was any supporting documentation, such as incident reports. When Morgan submitted his first worker’s compensation claim in 2009, he alleged arthritis in the “general parts of his body,” and injuries to his wrist, hip, ankles and knees.

These claims raised suspicion in the office of State Fund claims manager Andrea Guzman when a flier for a play was faxed to her. Starring in the production was Morgan. Guzman hired a private investigator to attend the play, “Misery Loves Company,” at Fairfield’s downtown Center for Creative Arts and record it. Jurors watched video of the performance in which it appeared Morgan played the role of a highly animated elderly gentleman who occasionally sang and danced. It was one of two separate theater performances that investigators attended and recorded.

By 2011, Morgan was collecting two-thirds of his regular take home pay due to a reported disability, according to testimony. However, investigators had already gathered video evidence of Morgan at a Vallejo schoolyard running his children through basketball drills.

In 2011, investigators collected video recordings from a Vallejo health club Morgan belonged to. The videos, which totaled more than seven hours worth and played before the jury, showed what investigators claimed was Morgan playing four-on-four pick-up basketball.

Morgan could face up to six years, eight months in state prison when he returns to court Nov. 10 for sentencing.

Misclassification Class Actions Now Aimed at DoorDash and GrubHub

Class action lawsuits were filed against on-demand delivery companies DoorDash and GrubHub in California state court this week. SF Weekly reports that the lawsuits allege that DoorDash and GrubHub are misclassifying delivery drivers as independent contractors instead of direct employees. The suits were filed in San Francisco by labor attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan. Liss-Riordan is also pursuing class action lawsuits over independent contractor classification against Uber, Lyft, and Postmates. On September 1, a judge granted Uber drivers class action status in Liss-Riordan’s suit. The Uber suit is the furthest along in the legal process of all the sharing economy worker classification lawsuits.

“The facts of all of these cases are so similar,” Liss-Riordan said of her numerous lawsuits against “sharing economy” companies. “There are minor variations here and there, but really they’re all just copying each other and thinking they can get away with it.”

DoorDash is an on-demand food delivery service similar to Postmates. Based in Palo Alto, the company operates in the Bay Area and 13 other markets nationally. DoorDash promises deliveries within 45 minutes. GrubHub is an online food ordering service that includes the brands Seamless, MenuPages, Allmenus, Restaurants on the Run, and DiningIn. GrubHub provides its own delivery drivers in some markets. Those are the workers that Liss-Riordan’s suit alleges are misclassified.

In addition to the complaints against DoorDash and GrubHub, Liss-Riordan filed a demand for arbitration against Caviar, another on-demand delivery service, also regarding the classification of a single employee as an independent contractor. According to Liss-Riordan, her law firm is representing all of the complainants individually, as well as in the class action cases.

Luxury Auction Scheduled as Fraudsters Sit in Jail

Tranzon Asset Strategies in Irvine has been hired by the Orange County district attorney’s office to sell items owned by Michael Vincent Petronella and his wife, Devon Lynn Kile. The auction will take place at 4 p.m. Oct. 8 in a ballroom at the Wyndham Hotel in Irvine by John Wayne Airport, 17941 Von Karman Ave.

Petronella and wife, Kile, owned three general contracting businesses, including Petronella Roofing in Costa Mesa and Cathedral City. They were arrested in 2009 and eventually convicted of workers’ comp insurance fraud, each receiving 10-year sentences. At the time it was touted as the biggest insurance fraud case in California history.

“State officials and prosecutors say the couple operated a $38 million workers’ compensation insurance-fraud scheme,” the Orange County Register reported in November 2010. The paper quoted prosecutors explaining, “Petronella and Kile declined to pay for employees’ insurance and taxes, and instead used the money for personal expenses, including buying two Ferraris, hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of jewelry, and Gucci, Chanel and Burberry handbags and shoes.”

What also made the arrest juicy tabloid fodder was the fact that Kile was being considered for the “Real Housewives” television franchise. So what happen to all this couple’s ill-gotten spoils?

Tiffeny Cook, vice president of Tranzon Asset Strategies says initially vehicles and equipment from Petronella Roofing were sold in 2010. Most of the real estate, a home in Laguna Hills, a condo in Aliso Viejo, a condo in the desert, and the commercial real estate in Cathedral City, were over-leveraged and went back to the lenders.

And the majority of their personal vehicles, including a Bentley, Ferrari and Range Rover, were leased. However, there was a second Ferrari, a 1987 Testarossa, and that will be included in the upcoming auction.

What else can bidders expect? Diamond Jewelry from Winston, including 10-carat diamond ring, diamond bracelets, diamond earrings, diamond necklaces and diamond rings. Watches by Rolex, Cartier, Chopard, Panerai and Breitling. 1987 Ferrari Testarossa US version with passive restraint system, engine type F113A040. 2004 Ford F150 Super Crew 139″ XLT, 2WD, 4.6 Liter V-8 100. Handbags by Louis Vuitton, Balenciaga, Chanel, Gucci, Prada, Versace, Dolce and Gabbana, Burberry and more. Many new and unused 100 Pairs of shoes (size 7.5) by Christian Louboutin, Christian Dior, Dolce and Gabbana, Prada, Manolo Blahnik, Gucci, Jimmy Choo and more, Many new in box and unworn Clothing by Gianni Versace (including vintage), Stella McCartney, Missoni, Mara Hoffman, DVF and more Designer sunglasses and accessories.

From this inventory, it is hard to agree with the adage that crime does not pay – at least for the short term.  But in the longer term, tt may seem true as this couple continues to serve ten long years in a cold prison cell.

Court of Appeal Limits Olgivie Rating Methods

Doreen Dahl sustained a cumulative industrial injury in 2005 (pre SB 863) to her neck and right shoulder while employed by Contra Costa County as a medical records technician. She was 49 years old and had worked for the county for over 8 years. Dahl’s vocational experts noted that she has a bachelor’s degree from CSU Hayward and a felony conviction for possession and sale of methamphetamine.

The WPI resulted in a rating of 59 percent disability. However, Dahl sought to rebut the scheduled rating through a vocational expert (Jeffrey Malmuth), and the County sought to counter that with its own expert (Ira Cohen). The WCJ initially awarded the 59% disability pursuant to the Schedule but it was was rejected on reconsideration. The WCJ then assigned Dahl a disability of 79 percent. The WCAB affirmed an increase based upon the Olgivie case in the second award. In doing so, the WCAB again concluded that “complete lack of amenability to vocational rehabilitation” is not “necessary before a LeBoeuf analysis may be properly applied.”

The Court of Appeal rejected the WCAB methodology in the published case of Contra Costa County v WCAB (Dahl) holding “When it devised this new methodology, the WCAB acted in excess of its authority.”

There are three methods to rebut the scheduled rating: 1) a factual error in the application of a formula or the preparation of the schedule, 2) when the injury impairs rehabilitation, and for that reason, the employee’s diminished future earning capacity is greater than the scheduled rating or 3) when a claimant can demonstrate that the nature or severity of the injury is not captured within the sampling of disabled workers used to compute the adjustment factor. The second method however requires that the diminished future earnings is directly attributable to the employee’s work-related injury, and not due to nonindustrial factors such as general economic conditions, illiteracy, proficiency in speaking English, or an employee’s lack of education. This case involved application of the second method.

Under the second method, the WCAB held that Dahl could rebut the scheduled rating by showing the injury impaired her amenability to rehabilitation, even where there was less than total permanent disability. The Court of Appeal responded by saying “We are skeptical of WCAB’s conclusion that an employee may invoke the second Ogilvie rebuttal method where the inability to rehabilitate results in less than a 100-percent permanent disability.” However the Court did not decide the case on that basis. Instead it concluded “There is no evidence that the injury even limited her rehabilitation prospects.”

“In sum, we find WCAB’s approach in this case flies in the face of Ogilvie and the 2004 amendments to the workers’ compensation scheme. Under the 2004 amendments, a claimant’s scheduled rating is presumptively correct. Ogilvie confirmed the Legislature meant what it said, and that claimants may not rebut their disability rating merely by offering an alternative calculation of their diminished future earning capacity.”

Owner and Foreman Charged With Manslaughter for OSHA Violations

Cal/OSHA’s criminal investigation into the December 2012 falling death of a 51-year-old carpenter in San Francisco resulted in manslaughter charges by the San Francisco District Attorney against the worker’s employer and foreman. Salvador William Versaggi of Sonoma, owner of Versaggi Construction, along with foreman John Fitt of Sebastopol pleaded not guilty on to the manslaughter charges and two counts of violation of the labor code.

On December 26, 2012, 51 year old Jose Plancarte was assigned to lower a window frame opening in the main stairwell of a residential construction site at 40 Edgehill Way in San Francisco. Plancarte had worked as a carpenter for Versaggi’s company, Versaggi Construction, for 20 years. He built a nailed-bracket scaffold and used two scaffold planks to access the window located more than 18 feet above ground. Plancarte was not wearing fall protection and the scaffold did not have guardrails. He was found unresponsive at the base of the stairwell, having fallen 18.5 feet to the concrete basement floor. Plancarte was transported to San Francisco General Hospital, where he later died from his injuries.

Cal/OSHA’s investigation determined that Versaggi Construction had failed to provide fall protection training to its workers at the site, and that foreman Jim Fitt was aware that Plancarte had cobbled together a prohibited type of scaffolding in direct violation to the employer’s own safety program.

Cal/OSHA’s civil investigation resulted in the issuance of four citations with penalties totaling $25,870 on March 29, 2013, including two citations for serious violations.