In Significant Ruling, California Court Of Appeal Expands Injured Workers' Rights To Compensation By Strengthening The "Premises Line Doctrine" As An Exception To The "Going & Coming" Rule
LOS ANGELES, Jan. 7, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- In the going and coming rule case of Schultz v. WCAB (JT3), the California Court of Appeal, second district, sided with the injured worker, ultimately determining that he was within the course and scope of his employment, when during morning commute to work, he sustained significant injuries in a car accident that occurred one mile within the boundary of an Air Force base, but miles from the actual office building he worked at within the base.
Under the going and coming rule, workers generally receive no benefits for injuries sustained in the course of their regular commute to and from work. Schultz won at trial level but was overturned by a 3-judge Worker's Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) panel. Schultz appealed to California Court of Appeal.
In the course of his appeal, Schultz presented two modes of liability as exceptions to the going and coming rule. The first mode focused on the use of his personal vehicle as an accommodation to his employer. Schultz's attorneys argued that based on evidence presented at trial, the going and coming rule is barred (and hence benefits should be provided) when the employee's job necessitated the use of a vehicle; when the few company vehicles shared by a large pool of employees were routinely unavailable to this employee; when there was, therefore, an implied requirement for the employee to use his own vehicle with implicit knowledge of his supervisors; and when the employee's use of his vehicle was a benefit to his employer.
The second mode of liability Schultz presented on appeal focused on the "premises line doctrine". Schultz's attorneys argued that the going and coming rule was not applicable, given that the injury had occurred not on route to the employer's premises, but within the employer's premises. It was demonstrated at trial that the employer employed more than 200 employees in multiple buildings within the restricted perimeter of the base; that the employer required its employees to travel to multiple sites across the base in service of clients; that those employees could only enter the base with a security clearance issued by the employer; and that the employee's auto accident occurred one mile within the base perimeter.
While the trial judge found for the injured worker by focusing on the first mode of analysis, the Court of Appeal came to a similar conclusion by instead relying on the second mode. This reliance affirms, expands, and restores the sheen to the premises line doctrine, a doctrine in need of a polish since it was described in a 1940's Supreme Court decision.
According to Mr. Schultz's attorney, Chris Asvar, "The Court's opinion allows for an analogy to be drawn in various future circumstances: Imagine an airline worker who is injured within the vast perimeter of an airport, but far from the actual airline office where she is employed; or a cook who is injured within the wide expanse of a school campus, but miles from the kitchen in which he works. This opinion will affect those good people and many others like them."
Regarding the present case, Asvar explained: "This was the quintessential David and Goliath battle. Mr. Schultz is not only an exemplary person, but according to every ounce of evidence presented at trial, he was an exemplary employee who got seriously injured. In accepting this case, we took on not only one of the most powerful insurance companies in the country, but also a defense contractor situated behind the secured gates of an air force base, insulated from even being served a subpoena. In the end, that very gate was instrumental in demonstrating that the injury broadly happened within that employer's premises."
Mr. Schultz's prior attorney dropped the case in 2011 after Harford insurance company denied the claim outright by invoking the going and coming rule.
Attorneys at Asvar Law, PC specialize in catastrophic injuries with a focus on brain injury litigation. Chris Asvar holds the record for the highest workers' compensation settlement in the nation.
SOURCE Asvar Law
Share this article