6DCA Oral Argument - 2026/01/06 - Jan 06, 2026

argument

6DCA Oral Argument - 2026/01/06

California Sixth District Court of Appeal 1h 50m 1 speaker 4 chapters transcribed 7 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What procedural announcements does the court make at the start of the oral argument?

Unknown 1:03

Anybody else able to hear anything that's here remotely?

Eric Ledger 1:10

I'm sorry, could you say that

Unknown 1:12

again? Is anybody else able to hear anything that's here remotely? Mr. Collin, they will turn the microphones on in just a minute. I will say it's harder to hear if they're not standing at the podium. Got it. All right. Thank you. Of course.

Dan Palin 2:04

Good

Unknown 2:16

morning. Please be seated. Welcome to the Sixth District Court of Appeal for oral argument this morning and Happy New Year to everyone. We have a few announcements to make before we start the calendar today. The first is to let you know, I'm sure you've gathered this, that this court offers the opportunity for remote access for oral argument for practitioners and self-represented litigants. And in fact, in our first case and in several of the cases, there will be parties appearing remotely. If you were sitting at council table, and for those of us here at the bench, we are able to both see and hear everything that the remote participant presents. If you are in the audience, you can hear, but you won't be able to see.

Unknown 3:03

If you want the visual experience as well, you're welcome to step into the waiting room where we have a live stream and you can watch there. We also archive the oral argument almost immediately after it's completed and you get both the audio and the visual through that as well. And since I'm speaking of technology, we'll let you know that the justices have their laptops here at the bench. So if you see us looking off to the right, or the left. We have the briefs, our own notes, the record. Everything is available to us up here, and so you should be prepared for that accordingly. We're going to go straight through the calendar today, and there will be a full panel change after the first case is heard.

Unknown 3:47

So with that, let me call H052785, Zenith Insurance Company et al. Petitioners vs. Workers Compensation Appeals Board, and Kin Chan. So appearing for petitioners this morning, if you could go to the podium and announce your appearance and confirm your time estimate, please.

Benjamin Covington 4:11

Good morning. Benjamin Covington on behalf of the petitioners. I'd like to reserve five minutes of my time for a bottle.

Unknown 4:16

All right.

Benjamin Covington 4:17

Could

Unknown 4:17

I just tell you, for me, you're going to have to speak up a little bit more.

Benjamin Covington 4:20

Yes. I apologize. Yes. Five minutes for a bottle, please.

Unknown 4:23

All right. So ten and five for you, Mr. Covington. I'm just going to have you stand off to my left here for a moment while we get the remainder of the appearances. So we have counsel for the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.

Eric Ledger 4:38

Good morning. Eric Ledger for Workers' Competition Appeals Board.

Unknown 4:41

Yes. And Mr. Ledger, your time estimate is eight minutes?

Eric Ledger 4:45

I spoke with Mr. Palin prior to, and it sort of depends on how the court the discussion this morning is. If the discussion is focused on the jurisdiction of the board, I'm going to take the majority of the time. If the discussion or the focus of the court is on the factual issues that are raised in the case, Mr. Palin is going to take the majority of time.

Unknown 5:03

All right. So between the two of you, though, we're figuring 15 minutes.

Eric Ledger 5:05

That's correct.

Unknown 5:06

All right. Thank you very much. And appearing remotely for Mr. Chan.

Dan Palin 5:12

This is Dan Palin for Mr. Chan. It's a pleasure.

Unknown 5:15

All right. Thank you, Mr. Pellin. And I heard about the time estimate, so I won't ask you about that. Mr. Covington, let's return to you and we will proceed.

Benjamin Covington 5:27

May it please the court. The workers' comp system is supposed to quickly and efficiently resolve factual disputes. But this case presents two practices by the WCAB that throw a wrench into that process. The first issue involves when the WCAB is supposed to rule on petitions for reconsideration. The legislature wants it done quickly and has set a 60-day deadline. But in this case, the WCAB took two years to rule, including 21 months after it received the petition. The second issue is the level of deference the WCAB must give to a workers' comp trial judge's factual findings. Like all appellate courts, the WCAB is supposed to give those findings deference. But here, it substituted its view on a factual question for that of the trial judge, even though it didn't have a copy of the trial transcript in front of it.