Legal Opinion
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 30, 2003No. E033208PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RICHLI, Acting P. J.
In this matter we hold that an employee who files a workers’ compensation claim seeking benefits for an injury to the psyche that derives from the effects of an admitted routine physical injury, cannot recover unless the employee has worked for the employer for at least six months. As the Board ruled otherwise, we annul the order under review.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The petition involves an issue of law, and the factual details may therefore be omitted. Velta Elaine Garcia (Applicant) suffered an admitted orthopedic injury to her back while employed by Wal-Mart (Employer)…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- California Teachers Ass'n v. Governing Board of Rialto Unified School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Western Growers Insurance v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Ralphs Grocery Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Gentis v. Safeguard Business Systems, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Rio Linda Union School District v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Matea v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Sierra Pacific Industries v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Facundo-Guerrero v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Duncan v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.