Diagnostic Data, Inc. v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Bd.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*558 Opinion
Appellant employer, Diagnostic Data, Inc., appeals from a judgment of the Santa Clara Superior Court denying its petition for a writ of mandate.
Under section 1030.5 of the Unemployment Insurance Code, a penalty may be assessed against the employer’s reserve account where the employer “willfully makes a false statement or representation or willfully fails to report a material fact concerning the termination of a claimant’s employment, . . .” The provision does not require an “intent to deceive.” We may properly assume that when the legislature added section 1030.5 to the code 1 it was aware of the language used in subdivision (a) of section 1257 2 of the same code, and if it had wished to impose an “intent” requirement, it would have adopted language such as that found in section 11482 3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
“It has been held that answers to written questions set forth in application forms relative to insurance are generally deemed material representations [citations]; and that in the making of a false representation which is material to the risk the presence of an intent to deceive is not essential [citation].” (Cal-West. States etc. Co. v.…