CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that the applicant sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The employer argued Labor Code section 3600(a)(9) barred the claim, as the applicant was engaged in off-duty recreation. However, the Board found the injury occurred on employer premises within the scope of employment, applying the "premises line rule" of the going and coming rule. The applicant's intent to engage in a walk after leaving the premises did not negate compensability for an injury sustained before exiting the employer's parking garage.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the employer's petition for reconsideration, upholding the administrative law judge's finding that the applicant sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of employment. The employer argued Labor Code section 3600(a)(9) barred the claim, as the applicant was engaged in off-duty recreation. However, the Board found the injury occurred on employer premises within the scope of employment, applying the "premises line rule" of the going and coming rule. The applicant's intent to engage in a walk after leaving the premises did not negate compensability for an injury sustained before exiting the employer's parking garage.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.