Gapusan

Gapusan v. Jay

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 769·66 Cal. App. 4th 734·78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 250·98 Daily Journal DAR 9771·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7094
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 9, 1998No. D027546California4,233 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haller, J.

In this personal injury action, City of San Diego (City) intervened seeking reimbursement for workers’ compensation benefits it paid its employees, Police Officers Edmund Gapusan and Frederick McGee. (Lab. Code, 1 § 3852.) We conclude the trial court violated section 3860, subdivision (b) by distributing half of the $200,000 settlement proceeds to the officers under equitable apportionment principles. We reject, however, City’s contention the error automatically entitles it to the entire settlement amount. While the court must adhere to the statutory scheme in allocating settlement proceeds subject to an employer’s reimbursement rights, the employer’s priority is subject to certain exceptions. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and remand for a new evidentiary hearing and redistribution of the proceeds in conformance with the views expressed herein.

Factual and Procedural Background

In 1994, Gapusan and McGee were seriously injured when a drunk driver, David Patrick Jay, caused his pickup truck to collide with their patrol car. *739 As a result, McGee was forced to retire and Gapusan was alternately off work and limited to light duty for more than two years.

Gapusan…

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.