Price v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
California Supreme Court
693 P.2d 254, 209 Cal. Rptr. 674, 37 Cal.3d 559 (1984)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Andrew Leo Price (plaintiff) was injured outside his workplace. Price was due to start working at 8:00 a.m., but he regularly arrived early for work. The employer’s doors were not opened at the same time every day. On some days, the doors were opened before 8:00 a.m., and Price was able to go inside and begin working early. On other days, they were opened after 8:00 a.m., and employees had to wait to enter. On the day of his injury, Price arrived at 7:45 a.m., walked up to his workplace, and found the doors were locked. The employer did not have a parking lot or any place to wait outside of the building, which was immediately next to a public sidewalk. Price returned to his car, which was parked on the side of the street. Price decided to put a quart of oil into his car while he waited. While Price was doing so, a passing car hit his leg. Price filed a claim for workers’-compensation benefits for his injury. The workers’-compensation judge allowed Price’s claim. The judge found that Price’s injury occurred within the course of his employment because he had arrived to work and was merely waiting to be let in, and pouring the oil was a small act of personal convenience that did not affect the employment relationship. On reconsideration, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (the board) (defendant) rescinded the award, finding that the going-and-coming rule precluded benefits because Price had not yet entered the employer’s premises. Price appealed to the California Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bird, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.