Schultz v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KRIEGLER, J.
Under the “going and coming rule” an award of workers’ compensation benefits is generally not available for injuries suffered by an employee during a local commute to a fixed place of business at fixed hours, because the injury does not occur during the ordinary course of employment. However, the ordinary course of employment is deemed to commence when an employee enters the employer’s premises (the premises line rule), and at that point, the going and coming rule does not bar workers’ compensation liability. We hold that the premises line rule applies to an employee…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- People v. ValdezCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Hinojosa v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- California Casualty Indemnity Exchange v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Cal. Cas. Ind. Exch. v. Industrial Acc. Com.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ables v. A. Ghazale Brothers, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2022
- Zadok v. Tarzana Springs CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2016