Fed. Ins. Co. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.
| Decision Date | 03 December 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. B249201,B249201 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, Adrienne Johnson, Respondents. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
See 2 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (10th ed. 2005) Workers' Compensation, § 115, 116.
Petition for Writ of Review: Petition granted; order amended, and remanded to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. (WCAB Case No. ADJ7224961)
Law Offices of Dean M. Stringfellow, Dean M. Stringfellow, Glendale, for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.
Law Offices of Mark A. Slipock, Mark A. Slipock, Woodland Hills, for Respondent Adrienne Johnson.
The applicant for workers' compensation was a professional basketball player who was not employed by a California team, has never resided in California, has played one professional game in California out of 34 games played during the 2003 season, and has suffered no specific injury in California. She seeks a workers' compensation award in California against her former non-California team and its insurer for a disability based on a cumulative injury. We hold that California does not have a sufficient interest in this matter to apply its workers' compensation law and to retain jurisdiction over the case. We also hold that we have jurisdiction to review the order in this case even though the decision of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Board) was not a final decision or order.
Adrienne Johnson (Johnson), the applicant and real party in interest, attended Ohio State University, graduating in 1997. Upon graduation, she was drafted by the Cleveland Rockers, a professional basketball team in the Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA), and played for them for two years. Johnson next played for the Orlando Miracle, which became the Connecticut Sun in 2003. In December 2003, an MRI revealed she had a knee injury, for which she had surgery in 2004. Although Johnson did not play during the 2004 season she signed with the Seattle Storm and practiced with that team in Seattle in 2005. She did not play for that team during the 2005 regular season and has not played in any professional games since the end of the 2003 season.
While playing for the Orlando Miracle, Johnson lived in Orlando, Florida. When her team moved to Connecticut, Johnson moved from Orlando to Hackensack, New Jersey, and she continued to play for that team. At the time of her September 2010 deposition in the workers' compensation proceeding in California, Johnson resided in Louisville, Kentucky and had been living there for two years.
Johnson sustained an injury to her right knee while playing for the Orlando Miracle in 1999. She had surgery for this injury in Orlando, Florida in 2000. In May 2001, while in training camp in Orlando, Johnson tore her Achilles tendon. She was treated again in Orlando and missed the entire 2001 season. She reinjured her right knee in 2003. Johnson signed a two-year contract with the Connecticut Sun on May 2, 2003. She signed this contract in Hackensack, New Jersey. Her agent was based in Ohio.
Johnson filed a workers' compensation claim in Connecticut in August 2003 for the injury to her right knee. It was resolved by a settlement resulting in a $30,000 payment to Johnson. Johnson played 34 games in the 2003 season, which was the full season. During that season, she played one game in Los Angeles, California on July 20, 2003.
After leaving professional basketball, Johnson worked briefly for a printing company and then as a substitute teacher in Kentucky for a year. She then went to work for the University of Louisville in 2006, where she was still working at the time of her deposition in this workers' compensation proceeding. Johnson complains of discomfort in her knee, hip, and shoulder. An agreed medical examiner opined in 2010 that Johnson had chronic conditions in her shoulder, spine, hip, and ankle. Another agreed medical examiner noted that her irritable bowel syndrome symptoms were related to her orthopedic problems.
Johnson's only contact with California was the one game she played in Los Angeles on July 20, 2003.1 She nevertheless made a claim against her employer, the Connecticut Sun, for workers' compensation and filed an application for adjudication of the claim filed with the California Division of Workers' Compensation/Workers' Compensation Appeals Board for her multiple basketball injuries. The employer's workers' compensation insurer was Federal Insurance Company, which is part of the Chubb Group of insurance companies for workers' compensation. The Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ) awarded disability indemnity, and in a petition for reconsideration, the Board rescinded the award and returned the matter to the WCJ for further proceedings to apportion the compensation between the present injury and past injuries for which she already received workers' compensation benefits in Connecticut. Johnson's employer, the Connecticut Sun and its insurer, Federal Insurance Company, petitioned for a writ of review, contending that the Board does not have jurisdiction over Johnson's claim. We granted the petition for review.
A petition for a writ of review generally may be sought only from a final order, decision, or award of the Board. (Lab.Code, §§ 5900, 59012; Maranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1074, 97 Cal.Rptr.2d 418; 2 Hanna, Cal. Law of Employee Injuries and Workers' Compensation (rev. 2d ed. 2013) § 34.10[2], p. 34–9 (Hanna).) Certain threshold issues, however, are reviewable by way of a writ of review before there is a final order in the case. Examples of such issues include whether the injuries arose out of and in the course of employment, the territorial jurisdiction of the Board, the existence of an employment relationship, and the applicability of the statute of limitations. (See Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 531–535, fn. 2, 163 Cal.Rptr. 750.) These threshold issues potentially are dispositive of the case. Review of such issues may resolve the case without the time, effort, and expense of fully litigating a case. As the court stated in Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, at pages 533–534, 163 Cal.Rptr. 750, Review of a threshold, dispositive issue generally is accepted. (See 2 Hanna, supra, at § 34.10[2], pp. 34–10 to 34–11.) This is an appropriate case for issuing a writ of review.
The issue in this case is which state's workers' compensation law applies, not which state has personal jurisdiction. (9 Larson's Workers' Compensation Law (rev. ed. 2013) § 140.02[1], p. 140–3 (Larson).) 3 The issue may be characterized as a “conflicts issue,” which arises when there are contacts in multiple states. ( Id. at § 140.01, p. 140–2.) But here, we must decide if California law may be invoked at all. Thus, “the question of jurisdiction ordinarily precedes the conflict of laws question, for only after the [workers' compensation] commissioner determines that he has authority to entertain the action does he proceed to the ‘choice’ of whether to award benefits under our Workers' Compensation Act or, rather, to defer to the earlier grant of benefits under the laws of another state” ( Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc. (1991) 218 Conn. 181, 588 A.2d 194, 198; see Jaiguay v. Vasquez (2008) 287 Conn. 323, 948 A.2d 955, 970 [] ) or to the workers' compensation law of another state. Thus, the WCJ's determination that “[p]laying in even one professional basketball game in California is sufficient to establish jurisdiction” mischaracterizes the issue, which is not one of personal jurisdiction but rather one of whether one or more state compensation laws apply and whether in this case California may provide a forum for the claim.
As we discuss, whether California's workers' compensation law governs depends on the application of the due process clause of the United States Constitution.4 If an employer or the insurer are subject to workers' compensation law of a state that does not have a sufficient connection to the matter they are deprived of due process. Also, the determination may depend on the application of the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution.5 That is, if the workers' compensation law of another state exclusively should apply and California does not have a sufficient contact with the matter, California must, under the full faith and credit clause, accede to the other state to provide a forum. .
In Bradford Electric Light Co. v. Clapper (1932) 286 U.S. 145, 52 S.Ct. 571, 76 L.Ed....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
California Employment Law Notes - January 2014
...parties." Non-Resident Professional Basketball Player Is Denied California Workers' Comp Benefits Federal Ins. Co. v. WCAB (Johnson), 221 Cal. App. 4th 1116 Adrienne Johnson, an applicant for California workers' compensation benefits, was a professional basketball player who was not employe......
-
Employment Law Case Notes
...Professional Basketball Player Is Denied California Workers' Compensation Benefits Federal Ins. Co. v. WCAB (Johnson), 221 Cal. App. 4th 1116 (2013)Adrienne Johnson, an applicant for California workers' compensation benefits, was a professional basketball player who was not employed by a Ca......