Poizner

Antelope Valley Press v. Poizner

Good Law
162 Cal. App. 4th 839·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 657·75 Cal. Rptr. 3d 887·2 Cal. WCC 415
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 2008B198139California7,373 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

This case poses the specific question whether, for purposes of workers’ compensation insurance, persons who make deliveries of newspapers for the newspaper publisher Antelope Valley Press (AVP) are independent contractors or employees. The question arises not under a claim for workers’ compensation benefits by one of the newspaper carriers (carriers), but rather with respect to the insurance premium that AVP was assessed for its workers’ compensation coverage.

California’s State Compensation Insurance Fund (State Fund) classified the carriers as employees for purposes of AVP’s workers’ compensation policy. AVP appealed the classification to the Department of Insurance’s administrative hearing bureau. (Ins. Code, § 11737, subd. (f); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 10, § 2509.46.) The administrative law judge (ALJ) who heard the case issued a lengthy proposed decision wherein he concluded that the carriers are employees for purposes of workers’ compensation insurance. The Insurance Commissioner (Commissioner) adopted that decision.

Thereafter, AVP filed a petition for writ of administrative mandamus. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5.) Reviewing the Commissioner’s decision under 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.