A high school teacher leaves school after the end of the day. The school, located in a bad neighborhood, provides parking for her in a district owned lot at the school. The teacher pulls out of the school lot onto the city street and approximately two blocks from the school while stopped at a red light a man forces his way into her car, assaults her and steals her purse.

• A. the injury is not compensable because of the going and coming rule
• B. the injury is not compensable because it did not occur in the school district's lot or on their property
• C. the injury is not compensable because it does not fall within any of the recognized exceptions of labor code S3600
• D. the injury is compensable because the employment subjected the employee to a "special risk"

Answer: (D)

This item tests the going-and-coming rule and, specifically, the special-risk exception to that rule. In California workers’ compensation law, injuries that happen while commuting to or from work are usually not covered. But there’s an important carve-out: if the employee is exposed to a risk that is peculiar to the job and arises from the employment, the injury can be compensable even during the commute.

Here, the district provides parking on school grounds in a district-owned lot, and the school lies in a high-crime area. The attack occurs as the teacher is leaving the lot and traveling along the route from the school to her home. The danger is tied to the employment setting—the parking arrangement and the location associated with the employer—so the risk is not just a general risk of everyday life. That makes this a “special risk” scenario, where the injury can be considered to arise out of and in the course of employment, even though it happened after leaving the school premises and off the lot.

So the injury is compensable because the employment subjected the employee to a special risk created by the work environment, not merely due to ordinary going-to-work or coming-home danger.