Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code sections 5305 and 3600.5(a); Hansell v. Arizona Diamondbacks (2022)
A contract of hire in California confers subject matter jurisdiction over workers' compensation claims even for out-of-state injuries.
The Board applied this standard to determine that the applicant's California contract of hire with the Los Angeles Rams conferred jurisdiction over the injury claim, making exemptions under sections 3600.5(c) and (d) inapplicable.
Grahe v. Philadelphia Phillies (2018); Riggs v. Miami Marlins (2022)
Exemptions under Labor Code section 3600.5(c) do not apply to athletes hired in California during the injury period.
The Board distinguished these cases as not involving California contracts of hire and found the Falcons' reliance on these exemptions misplaced.
From the decision · page 2The Atlanta Falcons acknowledge that while there may be subject matter jurisdiction,
pursuant to prior WCAB panel decisions the Falcons should be dismissed as being exempt from
these proceedings pursuant to Labor Code section 3600.5(c).
McKinley v. Arizona Cardinals (2013)
Choice of law/forum clauses in contracts do not override California's jurisdiction when there is a California contract of hire.
The Board found McKinley distinguishable because the applicant in that case had no California contract of hire, whereas here the applicant did, thus California jurisdiction applies despite choice of law/forum clauses.
From the decision · page 4The Falcons further contend that our decision in McKinley v. Arizona Cardinals (2013) 78
Cal.Comp.Cases 23 [2013 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 2], writ den. sub nom. McKinley v. Workers'
Comp. Appeals Bd. (2013) 78 Cal.Comp.Cases 872 [2013 Cal. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 122] (Appeals
Board en banc) requires that we enforce a choice of law/forum clause in the applicant's contracts
with the Falcons. (Petition, at p. 4:10.) Defendant avers, "McKinley requires, just as do the
previously cited cases of Grahe, supra; Riggs supra and Smith supra, that while Applicant may be
able to maintain a viable claim against the club over whom he entered in to a contract of hire in
California (the Rams); there is however no liability against the club over whom there is a
reasonable choice of law and choice of forum selection clause and they cannot be held liable for
the cumulative trauma claim." (Petition, at p. 4:23.)