The firm has successfully litigated a case at trial raising CA Labor Code section 3600.5(b) as a defense to bar the claim based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The firm represented the International Basketball League in a CT claim filed by a former professional basketball player, Marcus Liberty.  The IBL asserted there was no California subject matter jurisdiction over this case because Mr. Liberty was only temporarily in California performing services for his employer, his employer had insurance to cover him while he temporarily in California performing services and the State of Nevada had a statute which recognized the extra-territorial provisions of California’s Labor Code.  Based on these facts, the case fits squarely within the confines of California Labor Code section 3600.5(b) and thus the IBL was dismissed from the case as there was no subject matter jurisdiction over them.

The trial level decision (which is attached below) is the first known case where the 3600.5(b) jurisdictional defense was successfully asserted at trial to bar a claim against the employer.  In the Liberty case, the IBL was dismissed and the Applicant was to recover from his NBA employers who did not raise the jurisdictional argument.

With the proliferation of CT claims filed by former athletes, this is an important victory on behalf of the teams and leagues trying to limit the onslaught of CT claims being filed in CA by players who have been retired for literally dozens of years or more.

FIRM PREVAILS ON 3600.5(b) DEFENSE; NO CA SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION