Yu Qin Zhu v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

Good Law
12 Cal. App. 5th 1031·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 564·219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 630·2017 WL 2645307·82 Cal. Comp. Cases 692
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 2017No. B278696California3,103 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kriegler, J.

The *1035 petitioner, an in-home caretaker, was riding her bicycle from one private home where she worked to another home where she was scheduled to work when she was struck and injured by a car. Her employer, the California State Department of Social Services (Department), paid the petitioner for working at both of these locations.

A majority of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (appeals board) concluded *632 that the going and coming rule 1 barred the petitioner's claim for workers' compensation benefits. However, the dissent and the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) found that the required vehicle exception 2 to the going and coming rule applied because the petitioner was impliedly required to provide her own transportation between patients' homes.

After we granted the petition for a writ of review, the appeals board filed a brief stating that upon further consideration the appeals board has concluded that the required vehicle exception applies with the result that petitioner's injury arose out of and in the course of employment. The appeals board requests that we either annul its earlier decision and affirm the WCJ's decision or remand the matter to the appeals board…

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.