Ciga

California Insurance Guarantee Ass'n v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 4th 1528·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 265·2006 Daily Journal DAR 2296·39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 721·71 Cal. Comp. Cases 139
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 2006B180525, B183529California3,935 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rubin, J.

INTRODUCTION

After the Employment Development Department (EDD) paid temporary unemployment compensation disability (UCD) benefits to disabled workers Harry White and Francisco Torres, EDD filed lien claims for reimbursement with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Board). The insurers for White’s and Torres’s employers were insolvent. Under applicable California law (Ins. Code, § 1063 et seq.), California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) had assumed the insolvent carriers’ obligations, but refused to satisfy EDO’s liens. CIGA argued it was only required to pay a “covered claim” and FDD’s liens are excluded from the definition of “covered claims” as they are obligations to the State of California. (Ins. Code, § 1063.1, subd. (c)(4).) CIGA also relied on the decision in California Ins. Guarantee Assn. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 350 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 12 ] (Karaiskos).) In both the Torres and White cases, the Board ruled against CIGA. The Board relied on Viveros v. North Ranch Country Club (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 900 (in bank) and reasoned that Karaiskos applied only to EDD liens litigated separately after the injured worker and the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.