Daily Blast May 28, 2015

The California Supreme Court issued an opinion in South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (May 28, 2015, S215637) __ Cal.4th __, analyzing whether a claim for workers’ compensation death benefits has a separate and distinct causation standard and burden of proof requiring that an industrial injury constitute a “material factor” contributing to the employee’s death, or does the standard require only that the industrial injury be a “contributing cause.” The Supreme Court determined that “[in] the workers’ compensation system, the industrial injury need only be a contributing cause to the disability.” (Slip opn., p. 9.)

Clark’s family received workers’ compensation benefits after Clark died from the combination of drugs prescribed following a fall at work. (Slip opn., p. 1.) “The Court of Appeal overturned the award, reasoning there was insufficient evidence that the drugs prescribed for the work injury contributed to his death.” (Ibid.)

On review, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal’s judgment. (Slip opn., p. 1.) An injury arises out of the employment when there is a causal connection between the work conditions and the resulting injury. “Under this test, if the injury can be seen to have followed as a natural incident of the work and to have been contemplated by a reasonable person familiar with the whole situation as a result of the exposure occasioned by the nature of the employment, then it arises ‘out of’ the employment.” (Id. at p. 9, additional quotations and citations omitted.) Thus, “injury or death resulting from medical treatment of a work injury is compensable.” (Id. at p. 19.) Accordingly, “[death] attributable to both industrial and nonindustrial causes may support a death claim. . . .” (Id. at p. 10.)

Here, whether Clark’s industrial injury proximately caused his death within the meaning of Labor Code section 3600 was a question of fact, which the workers’ compensation judge (“WCJ”) resolved in favor of the employee. (Slip opn., pp. 13, 15.) Accordingly, judicial review of this issue is limited by statute to whether the award was not supported by substantial evidence and whether the factual findings support the award. (Id. at p. 14.) The Supreme Court determined that substantial evidence supported the WCJ’s findings that the prescribed drugs “for Clark’s industrial injury contributed to his death.” (Ibid., italics in original.)

Related Attorneys

Related Practices

• Appellate