CompFox AI Summary
The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's finding of jurisdiction, holding that the applicant did not present substantial evidence of a cumulative industrial injury incurred in California. Despite participating in practices on three occasions, the Board found these contacts insufficient to establish California's legitimate interest in adjudicating the claim, citing the Johnson case's standard. The Board determined that the applicant's participation in practices in California was de minimis and did not warrant the application of California workers' compensation law. Therefore, the applicant was ordered to take nothing on his claim.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's finding of jurisdiction, holding that the applicant did not present substantial evidence of a cumulative industrial injury incurred in California. Despite participating in practices on three occasions, the Board found these contacts insufficient to establish California's legitimate interest in adjudicating the claim, citing the Johnson case's standard. The Board determined that the applicant's participation in practices in California was de minimis and did not warrant the application of California workers' compensation law. Therefore, the applicant was ordered to take nothing on his claim.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.