CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for psychiatric injury. The defendant sought reconsideration of a finding that the applicant sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The defendant argued the injury was not supported by substantial medical evidence and was barred by Labor Code § 3208.3(h) as it was caused by lawful, good faith personnel actions. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report which found that the applicant's significant changes in work duties without adequate training constituted general working conditions, not specific personnel actions under § 3208.3(h). The Board affirmed the finding of injury AOE/COE, as the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof regarding the affirmative defense.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns a workers' compensation claim for psychiatric injury. The defendant sought reconsideration of a finding that the applicant sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The defendant argued the injury was not supported by substantial medical evidence and was barred by Labor Code § 3208.3(h) as it was caused by lawful, good faith personnel actions. The Board denied reconsideration, adopting the WCJ's report which found that the applicant's significant changes in work duties without adequate training constituted general working conditions, not specific personnel actions under § 3208.3(h). The Board affirmed the finding of injury AOE/COE, as the defendant failed to meet its burden of proof regarding the affirmative defense.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.