CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in this case involving two farm laborers injured in a traffic accident. The applicants claimed injuries arising out of and in the course of employment, and the primary issue was whether the "going and coming" rule applied. The Board affirmed the finding that the rule did not apply due to the "required vehicle" exception, which was based on the credibility of applicant Feliciano Barranda. The employer's petition for reconsideration was denied, upholding the finding that the employer benefited incidentally from the use of applicant Faustino Basabes' private van for transporting workers and tools between fields.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration in this case involving two farm laborers injured in a traffic accident. The applicants claimed injuries arising out of and in the course of employment, and the primary issue was whether the "going and coming" rule applied. The Board affirmed the finding that the rule did not apply due to the "required vehicle" exception, which was based on the credibility of applicant Feliciano Barranda. The employer's petition for reconsideration was denied, upholding the finding that the employer benefited incidentally from the use of applicant Faustino Basabes' private van for transporting workers and tools between fields.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.