From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gonzalez v. DeBerry

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Aug 17, 2011
A125251 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2011)

Opinion

A125251

08-17-2011

LUIS GONZALEZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ANDREA DeBERRY ET AL., Defendants and Respondents.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(San Francisco County Super. Ct.

No. CGC-07-466898)

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

BY THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on July 25, 2011, be modified as follows:

1. On page 17, the first two sentences of the first full paragraph are deleted and replaced with the following:

In this connection it is notable that Allstate voluntarily contributed an undisclosed amount to the settlement of the UEBTF claim. However, the record is unclear as to the nature and extent of respondents' insurance coverage. Although the existence of workers' compensation insurance was not fully explored by the trial court, it is apparent that respondents failed to show that appellant was "compensated" within the meaning of section 3706.

2. On page 8, the word "undisputed" is deleted from the last paragraph, second sentence, so the sentence reads:

The negligence per se theory here is not based upon an inapplicable provision of the Penal Code, but is instead based on the Cal-OSHA definition of
"employer" set forth in section 6304.5 and upon alleged violations of Cal-OSHA regulations (set forth in 8 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 1662, subds. (a) & (c), 1658, subd. (e).)

3. On page 10, the last sentence of the first full paragraph is deleted and replaced with the following sentence:

Here, appellant has not been compensated by respondents' workers' compensation carrier, and he is suing them as an employee, without claiming to be an independent contractor.

4. On page 16, the last sentence of the first full paragraph is deleted and replaced with the following sentence:

Respondents have not made this showing.

There is no change in the judgment.

Kline, P.J.


Summaries of

Gonzalez v. DeBerry

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Aug 17, 2011
A125251 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2011)
Case details for

Gonzalez v. DeBerry

Case Details

Full title:LUIS GONZALEZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ANDREA DeBERRY ET AL.…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

Date published: Aug 17, 2011

Citations

A125251 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2011)