What the panel ordered
Findings and Order issued on July 30, 2019, affirmed
Petition for Reconsideration granted to study jurisdictional issues; decision after reconsideration issued affirming prior Findings and Order
What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
The WCJ and WCAB found that subject matter jurisdiction exists because the applicant's contract of hire was made in California, which confers jurisdiction under Labor Code sections 3600.5(a) and 5305, and section 3600.5(d) does not exempt the defendant as it applies only when no contract of hire was made in California.
From the decision · page 1The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that subject matter jurisdiction exists over applicant's claim of cumulative injury as applicant was a California resident who executed his contract of hire in California, and that the Atlanta Braves were not excluded from subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Labor Code1 section 3600.5(d). The WCJ further found that the forum selection clause in applicant's contract was not enforceable.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.