Dakins v. Board of Pension Commissioners

• Citation: 134 Cal.App.3d 374,184 Cal.Rptr. 576
• Court: California Court of Appeals
• Decision Date: 28 July 1982
• Parties: Dennis C. DAKINS, Petitioner and Appellant, v. BOARD OF PENSION COMMISSIONERS FOR the CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondent and Respondent. Civ. 63274.

Page 576

184 Cal.Rptr. 576

134 Cal.App.3d 374

Dennis C. DAKINS, Petitioner and Appellant, v. BOARD OF PENSION COMMISSIONERS FOR the CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondent and Respondent.

Civ. 63274.

Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 3, California.

July 28, 1982.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 24, 1982.

Hearing Denied Sept. 30, 1982.

Lewis, Marenstein & Kadar and Michael T. Roberts, Los Angeles, for petitioner and appellant.

Ira Reiner, City Atty., Siegfried O. Hillmer, Asst. City Atty., Mary Jo Curwen and Beverly E. Mosley, Deputy City Attys., for respondent.

LUI, Acting Presiding Justice.

Statement of the Case

Appellant Dennis Dakins appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying his petition for writ of mandate. The question presented in this appeal is whether the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's (WCAB) Findings and Award determining that appellant's psychiatric injury was sustained in the course of his employment was binding on the respondent Board of Pension Commissioners for the City of Los Angeles (Board). For the reasons stated below, we conclude that the doctrine of collateral estoppel is applicable and therefore the WCAB's determination of appellant's work-related injury is binding on the respondent Board.

Facts

Appellant was an employee of the Los Angeles Police Department and a member of the City of Los Angeles (City) New Pension System for firefighters and police officers, created and established by and under the provisions of article XVIII of the Charter of the City of Los Angeles (Charter). Appellant first began his employment on March 24, 1968, and continued his employment until August 6, 1979.

The City is a municipal corporation which is organized with several departments. The Department of Pensions is under the control and management of a seven member Board which consists of five persons appointed by the Mayor, subject to the approval of the City Council, and two additional persons elected by the Fire and Police Departments, respectively. The Board administers the fire and police pension system for the City and has exclusive control of the administration of the pension funds which are invested pursuant to requirements set forth in the Charter or maintained in the City's treasury. A 1967 Charter amendment established the "New Pension System." Fire and police officers employed prior to 1967 are members of the Fire and Police Pension System set forth in article XVII of the Charter.

Appellant alleges in his petition for writ of mandate that between March 24, 1968, and August 6, 1979, while acting in the course and scope of his employment as a police officer for the City, he sustained a psychiatric illness consisting of anxiety.

Appellant filed an application for the adjudication of his compensation claim with the WCAB on August 16, 1979. The adjudication of the claim before the WCAB pertaining to his claimed psychiatric injury resulted in a Findings and Award dated January 8, 1980, which contained the following pertinent findings of fact: "2. Dennis C. Dakins born August 5, 1941, while employed during the period of time March 24, 1968 through August 6, 1979, as a police officer, by City of Los Angeles, Legally Uninsured, sustained an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of his employment consisting of anxiety. [p] 3.The injury herein caused continuing temporary total disability from August 7, 1979 through December 4, 1979 and thereafter for which indemnity is payable at $154.00 per week. [p] 4. Medical treatment is required to cure or relieve from the effects of this injury." (Emphasis added.)

Prior to the WCAB's issuance of its Findings and Award, appellant had filed an application with the Board on November 15, 1979, for a disability pension, stating that his disability was "mental stress, anxiety." Pursuant to Charter article XVIII, section 190.12(c), ¹ appellant was examined by three physicians, all of whom were psychiatrists. Subsequently, a Board hearing was conducted on July 10, 1980. Appellant appeared with counsel and testified before the Board. At the hearing, counsel for appellant made the following statement as part of his argument before the Board: "So when you look at the entire picture of medical opinion, you look at his testimony and the facts, the lack of outside sources, the fact that he has already had a Workers' Compensation proceeding which has determined this situation being work related, I think when you look at all of that, you have to conclude that it is a service-connected situation and that he is disabled from returning to work in any capacity...." There was no other reference to or argument concerning the res judicata effect of the WCAB Findings and Award on the appellant's application for disability before the Board. ²

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Board voted, by a five to two decision, in favor of the motion by one of the Board members that the appellant's "incapacity was caused by reason of sickness other than sickness caused by the discharge of his duties as a member of the Police Department and that it be the determination of the Board that Dennis C. Dakins be granted a nonservice-connected disability pension."

The Board's finding of fact no. 7 states: "That the Board of Pension Commissioners found that [appellant's] illness is not industrially caused and granted the [appellant] a nonservice-connected disability pension having found the [appellant] to be disabled."

At the regular meeting of the respondent Board on August 28, 1980, the Board made its final decision on appellant's application and formally adopted the findings of fact.

On October 10, 1980, appellant filed a petition for writ of mandate with the court below seeking to compel the Board to grant him a service-connected disability pension. In his points and authorities in support of a petition for writ of mandate, appellant argued that the WCAB Findings and Award were res judicata and therefore binding on the Board regarding the issue of causation of disability. The matter was argued and submitted to the court below. Exercising its independent judgment, the trial court found that the weight of the evidence supports the Board and denied the appellant's petition for writ of mandate. Neither the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law nor judgment mentions the WCAB Findings and Award. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

WCAB Findings and Award Are Res Judicata in Subsequent Pension Board Proceedings

Article XIV, section 4, of the California Constitution provides that the Legislature is "vested with plenary power, unlimited by any provision of this Constitution, to create, and enforce a complete system of workers' compensation, by appropriate legislation, ..." This power includes the provision "for the settlement of any disputes arising under such legislation by arbitration, or by industrial accident commission, by the courts, or by either, any, or all of these agencies, either separately or in combination, and may fix and control the method and manner of trial of any such dispute, the rules of evidence and the manner of review of decisions rendered by the tribunal or tribunals designated by it; provided, that all decisions of any such tribunal shall be subject to review by the appellate courts of this State...."

Pursuant to section 5301 of the Labor Code, ³ the WCAB is "vested with full power, authority and jurisdiction to try and determine all the matters specified in Section 5300 subject only to the review by the courts as specified in this division." Section 5300 provides that proceedings "[f]or the enforcement against the employer ... of any liability for compensation imposed upon him by this division [§§ 3201 to 6208] in favor of the injured employee, ..." shall be instituted before the WCAB. Section 3600 establishes employer liability "[w]here, at the time of the injury, the employee is performing services growing out of and incidental to his employment and is acting within the course of his employment."

The WCAB (formerly the Industrial Accident Commission) is a constitutional court. Accordingly, its final decisions are given res judicata effect. (French v. Rishell (1953) 40 Cal.2d 477, 480, 254 P.2d 26, Scott v. Industrial Acc. Com. (1956) 46 Cal.2d 76, 83, 293 P.2d 18; and 4 Witkin, Calif. Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Judgment, § 159, p. 3303.)

Appellant's workers' compensation claim was adjudicated in two parts, resulting in separate awards. An award was issued on June 22, 1979, compensating appellant for permanent injuries of 15 percent; this award was made pursuant to a written form entitled "STIPULATION WITH REQUEST FOR AWARD" entered into between appellant's counsel and counsel for the City. The stipulation was to the effect that appellant sustained an injury consisting of "hypertension" which arose out of and in the course of his employment as a police officer for the City.

Subsequently, a hearing was conducted on December 4, 1979, in connection with appellant's claim of psychiatric injuries of "anxiety" arising out of and occurring in the course of his employment. This hearing resulted in the previously mentioned Findings and Award of January 8, 1980, which found appellant's injuries of anxiety to be work-related and compensable. Appellant contends that the WCAB Findings and Award are binding on the Board. We agree.

"The doctrine of res judicata precludes parties or their privies from relitigating a cause of action that has been finally determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. Any issue necessarily decided in such litigation is conclusively determined as to the parties or their privies if it is involved in a subsequent lawsuit in a different cause of action. [Citations.] The rule is based upon the sound public policy of limiting litigation by preventing a party who has had one fair trial on an issue from again drawing it into controversy. [Citations.] The doctrine also serves to protect...