Reeves

Reeves v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 309·2000 Daily Journal DAR 4255·80 Cal. App. 4th 22·95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 74·65 Cal. Comp. Cases 359
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 24, 2000C033834California3,007 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scotland, J.

Loren Reeves (applicant), the chief engineer at one of California’s state prisons, filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, asserting he is entitled to a rebuttable presumption of industrial causation of heart trouble applicable to California Department of Corrections (CDC) employees “having custodial duties.” (Lab. Code, § 3212.2; further section references are to the Labor Code unless specified otherwise.) The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rejected applicant’s argument because his “primary” duties are not custodial. We issued a writ of review.

Applicant contends the WCAB misinterpreted section 3212.2 when it concluded the statute applies only to a CDC employee whose primary duties consist of the supervision of inmates. We agree that the WCAB erred.

As we shall explain, section 3212.2 is not limited to those whose primary or principal duties for CDC are custodial. The unambiguous language of the statute applies to correctional officers and other employees of CDC who have any duties that are custodial in nature.

Because the WCAB erroneously deprived applicant of the benefit of the statutory, rebuttable presumption, we shall annul the WCAB’s…

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.