Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

Delay in treatment did not show store fraudulently concealed injury

In California, an exception to workers' compensation exclusivity exists where an employer fraudulently conceals the existence of the injury and its connection with the employment.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

Case name: Maraj v. Ralphs Grocery Co., No. B223410 (Cal. Ct. App. 05/25/11, unpublished).

Ruling: In an unpublished decision, the California Court of Appeal held that a worker could not show that an exception to workers' compensation exclusivity applied.

What it means: In California, an exception to workers' compensation exclusivity exists where an employer fraudulently conceals the existence of the injury and its connection with the employment.

Summary: A worker at a grocery store tried to raise the flag on the flag pole at the store where she worked. A shopping cart was placed on the pole as a prank by a third party. The cart fell on her head, causing a severe neck fracture, brain injury, and deficits in her mobility, self-care, and cognition. The store director arrived at work and was informed that the worker was injured. The director saw the worker bleeding on the ground and told another worker to call the company the store calls when an employee is injured. While waiting for paramedics, the director held a towel to the worker's head.

The worker sued the store, asserting that workers' compensation did not apply because the store fraudulently concealed her injury and its connection with her employment. The California Court of Appeal held that the worker did not raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the exception applied.

The court explained that no evidence showed that the store concealed the worker's injuries or their connection to her employment. The director immediately took action and had another worker call the company the store called when workers were injured. The director also gathered workers' compensation paperwork to take to the hospital. Although paramedics were not called until 40 minutes after the injury, no evidence showed the delay in treatment was to conceal the injury's existence.

The court said there was also no evidence that the injury was aggravated by the store's employees. A doctor's opinion that he could not rule out the possibility that displacement of her spine occurred during the director's toweling her head and the delay in calling paramedics was speculative.

The court also said that any pain the worker suffered was collateral to her injury, not an aggravation, contrary to the worker's argument.

Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage.

August 1, 2011

Copyright 2011© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.