California lawmakers are considering a new bill that would make it more difficult to file cumulative trauma claims in California.
State Sen. Laura Richardson (D – San Pedro) introduced Senate Bill 795, which would place more limitations on the ability to file cumulative trauma (CT) claims. The bill states that the ability to file a CT claim would be barred if:
- The athlete did not perform any work in California, or
- If the athlete was temporarily in California.
- Definition of temporarily: If the athlete performs less than 20% of their duty days in California, during the last 365 days of their career.
- Definition of athlete: Someone who plays baseball, flag/tackle football, basketball, hockey, soccer, lacrosse, softball, volleyball, cricket, or rugby.
The bill has an exception to this rule, which states that an athlete can file a claim if:
- The athlete worked for 2 or more seasons for a California-based team or teams, as defined, or worked 20% or more of their duty days in California, and
- Worked for fewer than 7 seasons for any team other than a California-based team over the their entire career as a professional athlete.
As for which team would be liable for the claims, the bill states that liability is to be determined against the last team for whom the athlete played while regularly working in California, or the team that hired the professional athlete in California.
The bill would apply retroactively to any claim not finalized by May 11, 2026.
WHERE THE BILL IS AT IN THE LEGISLATURE
The state Senate already approved the bill, and it is currently in the General Assembly. The next stop for the bill is likely the Assembly Insurance Committee according to WorkCompCentral, who is unlikely to schedule a hearing on the bill until after the summer recess ends on Aug. 3, 2026.
That is relevant because the Assembly Insurance Committee engages in detailed discussions that can result in changes to a bill’s statutory language. In other words, your humble blogger would urge readers to double-check the language for new amendments after the committee has weighed in on it.
If the Senate and Assembly have different versions of the bill, they would have to “conference” and iron out any differences before sending it to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for approval or a veto.
The bill faces some opposition from labor groups such as the NFL Players Association, who has said they strongly oppose the bill according to various articles from ProFootballTalk.com.
IF THAT SOUNDS FAMILIAR
Please recall that in 2013, lawmakers approved Assembly Bill 1309. That bill edited sections of Labor Code section 3600.5(c) and (d) to make it more difficult for players to file claims in California.
Later, in 2025, the 4th District Court of Appeal published a decision in the case of Atlanta Falcons v. WCAB (Wayne Gandy) that interpreted those statutes. In that case, the court ruled that a single contract of hire in the state of California was not sufficient to overcome the statutory requirements in LC 3600.5(c) and (d) that barred Gandy’s claim.
To read more about the Gandy decision, click here.
Got a question about workers’ compensation defense issues or pending legislation? Feel free to contact John P. Kamin. Mr. Kamin is a workers’ compensation defense attorney and partner at Bradford & Barthel’s Woodland Hills location, where he monitors the recent legislative affairs as the firm’s Director of the Editorial Board. Mr. Kamin previously worked as a journalist for WorkCompCentral, where he reported on work-related injuries in all 50 states. Please feel free to contact John at jkamin@bradfordbarthel.com or at (818) 654-0411.
Viewing this website does not form an attorney/client relationship between you and Bradford & Barthel, LLP or any of its attorneys. This website is for informational purposes only and does not contain legal advice. Please do not act or refrain from acting based on anything you read on this site. This document is not a substitute for legal advice and may not address every factual scenario. If you have a legal question, we encourage you to contact your favorite Bradford & Barthel, LLP attorney to discuss the legal issues applicable to your unique case. No website is entirely secure, so please be cautious with information provided through the contact form or email. Do not assume confidentiality exists in anything you send through this website or email, until an attorney/client relationship is formed.