WCAB

City of San Diego v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

Good Law
108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 510·89 Cal. App. 4th 1385
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 2001D036744California1,251 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

Under principles of workers’ compensation law, an employee commuting to or from work is generally not considered to be acting within the scope of his or her employment at that time. (Dimmig v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd. (1972) 6 Cal.3d 860, 865-866 [ 101 Cal.Rptr. 105 , 495 P.2d 433 ].) This principle, which is known as the “going and coming” rule, is subject to an exception where the commuting employee is on a special mission or errand for the employer. (Id. at p. 868.) We hold that a police officer whose duties include testifying in court is not on a special mission while commuting from home to court to testify.

Factual and Procedural Background

San Diego Police Officer Stephen E. Molnar was required by subpoena to attend a court proceeding on a day that he was not scheduled to report for duty. He was scheduled to testify on a matter arising out of his police work as a patrol officer. While Molnar was driving his personal car from home to the courthouse, he was injured in an accident. Thereafter, Molnar submitted a claim for workers’ compensation benefits to his employer, the City of San Diego (the City), which is self-insured for workers’ compensation purposes. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.