Legal Opinion
Save Mart Stores v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 14, 1992No. F016109PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BUCKLEY, J.
In this opinion, we hold that one is not a qualified injured worker within the meaning of the workers’ compensation law merely because of an inability to coexist with other workers or supervisors, so long as an equivalent position is available at the same place of employment.
Factual and Procedural History
On May 15, 1986, Julie Gwin filed an application for workers’ compensation benefits, alleging that between March 22, 1985, and March 21, 1986, she sustained injury to her psyche from stress related to her employment as an administrative assistant with petitioner Save Mart…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- LeVesque v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Albertson's, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Granberry v. Islay InvestmentsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Barns v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Department of Rehabilitation v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Le Parc Community Ass'n v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Cedillo v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Benson v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Telles Transport, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.