Note from the Editors

• Publication year: 2022
• Author: VIVIANA SANTIAGO, ESQ.

Note from the Editors

VIVIANA SANTIAGO, ESQ.

ANTIOCH, CALIFORNIA

JUSTIN SONNICKSEN, ESQ.

OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA

Welcome to Volume 35, No. 2, of the Workers' Compensation Quarterly! We think you will find a good deal of interesting and useful information in this issue.

Here you will find "See's Candies v. Superior Court of California: Defining the Limits of the Exclusive Remedy Doctrine in Workers' Compensation." This is a rejoinder from the applicant's bar to "The See's Candies Decision: Employers May Be Liable for Third-Party Covid Damages Traced Back to Their Employees," in Vol. 35, No. 1, of the Quarterly. That article provided the defense perspective on how this Court of Appeal decision could lead to increased civil litigation, depending on interpretations of the holding going forward. This time we hear from an applicant's attorney. He provides an analysis of the recent See's Candies case and its impact on the derivative injury rule in workers' compensation.

Another interesting case in this issue involves a criminal action in which the uninsured employer was ordered to pay restitution. "When Does a Court of Appeal Have Jurisdiction over a WCAB Decision?" addresses the issue of when the Court of Appeal, not the WCAB, has authority over a workers' compensation award.

This issue of the Quarterly also features a thoughtful article by an applicant's attorney and workers' comp blogger. In "Practice Long and Prosper: A Manifesto for the Workers' Comp Community," he provides a number of practice tips that both new and experienced attorneys will find helpful in their day-to-day practice. The article highlights the many ways the practice has changed, particularly over the past two years.

We are thrilled to honor the recipients of the 2022 Workers' Compensation Special Recognition Awards...