California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Lopez v. Sikkema, 229 Cal.App.3d 31, 280 Cal.Rptr. 7 (Cal. App. 1991):
An injury is compensable under the Workers' Compensation Act when the conditions of compensation concur. (Lab.Code, 3600.) When the conditions of compensation do not concur, the liability of the employer is the same as if the Workers' Compensation Act had not been enacted. (Lab.Code, 3602, subd. (c).) One of the conditions of compensation is that the employee, at the time of the injury, "is performing service growing out of and incidental to his or her employment and is acting within the course of his or her employment." (Lab.Code, 3600, subd. (a)(2).) Workers' compensation is not the exclusive remedy when the conduct complained of on the part of the employer cannot be viewed as a risk of the employment--when the employer has stepped outside of the proper role of an employer. (Cole v. Fair Oaks Fire Protection Dist. (1987) 43 Cal.3d 148, 161, 233 Cal.Rptr. 308, 729 P.2d 743.) In such cases an action at law for damages is permitted. (Ibid.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.