Vaught

Vaught v. State of California

Good Law
157 Cal. App. 4th 1538·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 2050·69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 605·1 Cal. WCC 1048·42 A.L.R. 6th 673
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 18, 2007D050358California3,068 words

Opinion

Opinion

McCONNELL, J.

We hold the workers’ compensation exclusivity rule of Labor Code section 3602 bars the civil action of plaintiffs Marck O. Vaught (Marck) and Maria Vaught (Maria) (together the Vaughts) against March’s employer, the State of California (State), for injuries he sustained while residing on state premises. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Since 1981, Marck has worked as a park ranger for the State, through the Department of Parks and Recreation (Department). In 2004, Marck accepted a new position as resource ranger in the State’s Colorado Desert District (District). March’s position required him to be on call “all the time.”

As inducement to accept the new ranger position, the State offered the Vaughts residence in the smaller of two homes it owns in Vallecito Ranch, located within the District. Marck rejected that offer, but agreed to take the position if they could live in the larger ranch house. Marck admitted the State offered him residence in the ranch house as an “employment benefit.” The Vaughts agreed to a month-to-month rental agreement with the State and moved into the ranch house.

The Vaughts later discovered a water leak…

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.