Top Headlines

Case Summaries

ERISA

[11/07] Leon v. Berryhill
Affirming the district court's decision to remand for further administrative proceedings in a claimant's action seeking Title II disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act and reversing as to credit-as-true rulings for a failure to provide sufficient reasoning and errors in the district court's application of the three-step credit-as-true rule.

[10/31] Micha v. Group Disability Benefits Plan
In an attorney's fees action, arising from an ERISA case, the district court's denial of appellate attorney's fees under 29 U.S.C. section 1132(g)(1) is reversed. The Court held that when analyzing a party's request for appellate attorney's fees under the rubric of Hummell v. S.E. Rykoff, 634 F.2d 446 (9th Cir. 1980), a court must consider the entire course of litigation instead of focusing exclusively on the prior appeal.

[10/26] Revels v. Berryhill
Reversing the district court's order affirming the denial of supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration in the case of a man suffering from arthritis, obesity, and fibromyalgia because fibromyalgia has been ruled by the Social Security Administration to be a severe impairment and the ALJ failed to provide legally sufficient reasons for rejecting expert opinions.

[10/26] Diedrich v. Berryhill
Partially affirming and partially reversing the district court order affirming to the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of Social Security Disability Insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act because the ALJ erred by not calling a medical advisor at the hearing, by giving too little weight to a fiance's testimony, and by finding the claimant only partially credible, but also finding that the errors were harmless and ordering the decision to be vacated, that the medical advisor be called, and that a new order be issued consistent with the opinion.

Read More

Workers' Comp

[10/24] Gholipour v. The Superior Court of San Diego County
Denying the petition for writ of mandate challenging an order by the trial court relating to the amount of petitioner's restitution because although the case was transferred to the superior court of another county while her appeal from a workers' compensation fraud conviction was pending, the trial court retained jurisdiction over restitution.

[10/13] American Cargo Express, Inc. v. Superior Court
In a workers' compensation action, arising after the California Self-Insurers' Security Fund (SISF) assumed the workers' compensation obligations of Mainstay Business Solutions and sued it and its clients to recover costs and liabilities, the trial court's grant of SISF's motion on the pleadings is affirmed where Labor Code section 3744, subdivision (c) authorizes SISF to bring such an action in superior court.

[10/06] Ford v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
In a workers' compensation action, the petition for review of an award of benefits is denied where the worker suffered a compensable injury entitling him to benefits, independent of his committing three criminal workers' fraud offenses.

[09/15] Ly v. County of Fresno
In a labor & employment action, brought by three Laotian correctional officers alleging racial discrimination in employment actions and retaliation after complaining about them, the trial court's grant of summary judgment to defendant county is affirmed where the denial of plaintiffs' separate workers' compensation claims bar their claims in this action on res judicata grounds.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.