A California Court of Appeal affirmed a ruling that injuries, even fatal injuries, sustained by a volunteer may not lead to liability for a school district if the district has designated volunteers as employees for purposes of workers’ compensation. Kuo v. Dublin Unified School District (2025) 109 Cal.App.5th 662 held that under Labor Code section 3364.5, when a school district adopts a resolution deeming volunteers to be employees for purposes of workers’ compensation, the sole remedy for a volunteer injured or killed while performing services for a district, is workers’ compensation. The holding is a reminder for school districts and county superintendents of schools to review whether they have, or should, adopt a resolution designating volunteers as employees for purposes of workers’ compensation.
Background
A volunteer was tragically killed when a truck struck her on school district grounds. The volunteer’s family filed a lawsuit for negligence and premises liability and sought to recover damages from the District.
The District had previously adopted a resolution declaring that volunteers shall be entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for any injury sustained by them while performing any service under direction and control of the District. Based on this resolution, the District filed for summary judgment under Labor Code section 3364.5 which provides: “a volunteer, unsalaried person authorized by the governing board of a school district or the county superintendent of schools to perform volunteer services … shall, upon the adoption of a resolution … so declaring, be deemed an employee … for the purposes of this division and shall be entitled to the workmen’s compensation benefits … for any injury sustained by him while engaged in the performance of any service under the direction and control of the governing board of the school district or the county superintendent.”
The trial court agreed with the District and granted summary judgment in the District’s favor meaning the family’s remedy was limited to workers’ compensation. The family appealed.
Decision
On appeal, the family made two arguments in an attempt to hold the District liable. The Court of Appeal rejected both and affirmed judgment for the District.
First, the family argued that the limitation to workers’ compensation only applied to injuries, but not death. The Court disagreed with the family and held that “death” must be included in the phrase “any injury.” “We conclude that fatal injuries unambiguously fall into the category of ‘any injury’ according to its plain meaning.”
Second, the family argued that the District failed to “deem” volunteers as employees because the resolution adopted by the District did not use the word “deem” and the District did not treat its volunteers as employees. Again, the Court rejected both arguments. It found that there was not a statutory requirement to include the word “deem” in the resolution, only that the resolution declare that volunteers were entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. Further, it found that the failure to notify volunteers of their entitlement to workers’ compensation benefits did not alter the impact of Labor Code section 3364.5 in this case.
Impact
This decision highlights the impact that adopting a resolution deeming volunteers to be employees for purposes of workers’ compensation may have in protecting the agency from liability. Workers’ compensation is a “no-fault” system which guarantees the benefits of workers’ compensation, but can also protect the agency against the potential of damages.
Local education agencies should confirm whether they have adopted such a resolution or consider whether they should do so in the future. If you have any questions about adopting such a resolution or this case, please reach out to an attorney in DWK’s Litigation Practice Group.
