CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ7269472
Regular
Mar 20, 2012

SHARON EWEGBEMI vs. OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a WCJ's finding that the applicant did not sustain an injury in the course of employment. The applicant argued exceptions to the going-and-coming rule, including special mission, dual purpose, special risk, and required vehicle exceptions. Reconsideration was granted because crucial hearing minutes and summary of evidence were missing from the record, and the original WCJ was unavailable. This prevents the Board from issuing a just decision and necessitates further review.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardGoing and Coming Rule ExceptionSpecial Mission ExceptionSpecial Risk ExceptionRequired Vehicle ExceptionCourse of EmploymentSidewalk InjuryConstructive PremisesPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and Order
References
Case No. ADJ7987695 ADJ7987686
Regular
May 08, 2014

VANESSA BRUCE vs. VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM/PHYSICIANS FOR HEALTHY HOSPITALS; CRUM & FORSTER AND TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT

The applicant, a licensed vocational nurse, sought workers' compensation for injuries sustained when she fell asleep driving home after working three extra hours off the clock due to a coworker's issue. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied her petition for reconsideration. The WCAB found the injury did not arise out of or occur in the course of employment, as the "going and coming rule" applied and neither the "special mission" nor "special risk" exceptions were met. The applicant's decision to stay late was voluntary, not at the employer's request, and falling asleep while driving is a common risk, not a special employment-related hazard.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardLicensed Vocational NurseSpecific InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjuryHeadachesCumulative InjurySleep DisorderGoing and Coming RuleSpecial Mission Exception
References
Case No. ADJ10204439
Regular
Sep 02, 2016

JEFF SMITH vs. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the County of Riverside's petition for reconsideration. The Board found that Deputy Sheriff Jeff Smith's injury, sustained en route to mandatory employer-ordered training, fell under the "special mission" exception to the "going and coming rule." The training's deviation in location, time, and nature from Smith's regular duties satisfied the three-part test for a special mission. Therefore, Smith's injury was deemed to have arisen out of and occurred in the course of employment.

going and coming rulespecial mission exceptionspecial errand exceptionDeputy Sherifftraffic investigation classBen Clark Training Centermotor vehicle accidentcourse of employmentroutine dutiesemployer's benefit
References
Case No. ADJ10147686
Regular
Jun 12, 2017

TOBY LAPESARDE vs. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision finding the applicant's injury compensable. The Board rescinded the original findings and returned the case for further proceedings to determine if the "special risk" exception to the going-and-coming rule applies. The WCJ initially found the injury compensable under the "special mission" exception, but the Board noted credibility issues regarding the applicant's assertion of mandatory overtime. The applicant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident while commuting home after working a double shift.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryLicensed Vocational NursePetition for ReconsiderationFindings of FactGoing and Coming RuleSpecial Mission ExceptionSpecial Risk ExceptionMandatory OvertimeCollective Bargaining Agreement
References
Case No. ADJ8610560
Regular
Sep 19, 2013

William Brown (Deceased), Annette Brown vs. SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS

This case involves a widow's petition for workers' compensation death benefits for her truck driver husband who died in a motorcycle accident after leaving work. The administrative law judge denied the claim, finding it barred by the going and coming rule. The applicant argued the special risk exception applied due to hazardous road conditions and a quantitatively greater risk compared to the general public. The majority of the Appeals Board denied reconsideration, agreeing with the WCJ that the risks were not exclusive to employment.

Going and Coming RuleSpecial Risk ExceptionDeath BenefitsMotor Vehicle AccidentIndustrial InjuryTruck DriverNegligencePublic RoadZone of DangerHazard
References
Case No. ADJ18302905
Regular
Jul 25, 2025

CHRISTIAN CHAVEZ vs. JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION, STARR INDEMNITY AND LIABILITY COMPANY

Defendant sought reconsideration of a Findings and Order (F&O) issued on April 15, 2025, by a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found that the applicant, Christian Chavez, sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment, and that this injury was not barred by the going and coming rule, based on the special risk exception. Defendant contended that there was no evidence to support the application of the special risk exception. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reviewed the petition, applicant's answer, and the WCJ's report, ultimately denying the petition for reconsideration and concurring with the WCJ's findings regarding the special risk exception.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardChristian ChavezJetBlue Airways CorporationStarr Indemnity and Liability CompanyAdjudication Number ADJ18302905Los Angeles District OfficePetition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderArising out of and in the course of employment (AOE/COE)Going and coming rule
References
Case No. ADJ7304028
Regular
Jan 16, 2013

ROBERT DECOURCEY, JR. vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) rescinded its prior finding of injury for Robert Decourcey, Jr. This decision follows a Court of Appeal ruling that a shift swap did not constitute a "special mission" exception to the going and coming rule. Therefore, Decourcey's injury sustained during his commute after the shift exchange was not deemed industrial. The applicant is awarded nothing for his claim except for potential reimbursement of medical-legal costs.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After Remittiturgoing and coming rulespecial mission exceptionspecial risk exceptionshift swapcorrectional officerindustrial injuryCourt of AppealPetition for Review
References
Case No. ADJ6490654
Regular
Nov 23, 2009

KI B. CHOI vs. UNION LEE CONSTRUCTION, INC., STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

The WCAB denied applicant's petition for reconsideration of the September 10, 2009 Findings and Order, affirming the WCJ's decision that the applicant did not sustain an industrial injury. The applicant's injury occurred during his commute home, and the court found that the special mission/errand exception and other arguments did not apply.

Going and coming rulespecial mission exceptionspecial risk exceptioncommercial traveler ruleLabor Code section 5402presumption of compensabilitycourse of employmentindustrial injurypetition for reconsiderationWCJ report and recommendation
References
Case No. ADJ6657993
Regular
Oct 04, 2010

Fred Banales vs. Bank of America, Gallagher Bassett

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior decision that denied applicant Fred Banales' claim for industrial injury. The WCAB found that the administrative law judge (WCJ) may have improperly focused on the applicant's cell phone use and the accident occurring on a public street, rather than the potential special risk exception to the going-and-coming rule. The Board rescinded the prior findings and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings, including the admission of additional evidence like the police report, to determine if the employer's parking lot exit posed a special risk.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardIndustrial InjuryGoing and Coming RuleSpecial Risk ExceptionParking Lot ExitPublic StreetCell Phone UsageTraffic AccidentReconsiderationFindings of Fact
References
Case No. ADJ2112759 (ANA 0406243)
Regular
Feb 22, 2009

Matt Todd vs. INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board reversed a finding that applicant Matt Todd sustained an industrial injury during his commute. The Board determined that Todd's motorcycle accident en route from the Union Hall to the employer's premises was barred by the "going and coming" rule. Todd failed to establish that the trip was an extraordinary mission or that the commute involved a special risk distinct from the general public. Furthermore, the Board found insufficient evidence that the Union Hall acted as the employer's agent in dispatching Todd.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationIndustrial InjuryMotorcycle AccidentCommuteUnion HallCasual LaborerGoing and Coming RuleSpecial Mission DoctrineSpecial Risk Exception
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,472 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational