Duncan

Duncan v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Good Law
18 Cal. App. 5th 460·226 Cal. Rptr. 3d 300
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2017G054220California4,789 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Aronson, J.

*465 Respondent Denise Michelle Duncan sued Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Wal-Mart) for personal injuries she sustained at one of Wal-Mart's stores while acting within the course and scope of her employment with Acosta, Inc.

*466 (Acosta). The trial court entered judgment finding Wal-Mart liable for Duncan's injuries. Under Labor Code sections 3852 and 3856, 1 appellant Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company (Hartford) applied for a lien on Duncan's judgment to obtain reimbursement for the workers' compensation benefits it paid Duncan, including medical expenses and temporary disability payments for lost wages. Although the judgment included compensation for Duncan's medical expenses, it did not include compensation for Duncan's lost wages because she did not seek those damages at trial. The court granted Hartford a lien on Duncan's judgment, but reduced the lien amount to exclude the indemnity payments for lost wages.

Hartford appeals the trial court's postjudgment order, arguing the court exceeded its authority by reducing the lien amount for any item other than reasonable attorney fees and costs. We agree because section 3856's plain language and the case law applying it grant…

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.