A former bus driver trainee's legal battle against a transportation company has reached a conclusion, as the California Court of Appeal affirms the dismissal of his case. The plaintiff, Haoxiao Liu, filed the complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court on July 19, 2021, against Goldengate Bus Inc. and its associate Gang Guo.
The case traces back to an incident on July 22, 2019, when Liu, while training as a bus driver for Goldengate Bus Inc., sustained multiple injuries during a multi-hour trip with a driving trainer. Initially seeking compensation through small claims court on December 26, 2019, Liu was awarded $615. However, dissatisfied with this outcome and alleging further negligence and intentional torts by his employer, he escalated the matter to a higher court in July 2021.
Liu's lawsuit claimed that Goldengate Bus Inc. failed to provide a safe work environment and neglected their duty to protect him as an employee. He also accused them of not reporting his injury to their insurance company and failing to pay promised wages. His allegations extended to charges of abuse of power and creating a hostile work environment. "As a direct result of defendants’ [negligence], abuse of power, [and] hostile work environment," Liu stated in his complaint, "he suffered injuries."
In response to these accusations, Goldengate Bus Inc. filed a demurrer—a plea to dismiss the case—arguing that Liu's claims were barred by the exclusive remedy rule under workers' compensation laws and by doctrines such as res judicata (claim preclusion) and collateral estoppel (issue preclusion). The trial court sided with Goldengate Bus Inc., sustaining their demurrer without leave for Liu to amend his complaint.
Judge Colin P. Leis ruled that Liu’s claims were indeed barred by the exclusivity provision of California’s Workers’ Compensation Act since they arose out of employment-related injuries. Additionally, the court found that Liu’s claims had already been adjudicated in small claims court, thus invoking res judicata.
Liu appealed this decision but faced significant hurdles. The appellate court noted that trial court judgments are presumed correct unless error is affirmatively shown—a burden Liu did not meet. The appellate record lacked substantial evidence or legal citations supporting his arguments against the trial court's ruling.
Furthermore, Liu argued that exceptions to the workers' compensation exclusivity rule should apply in his case—such as dual capacity doctrine or fraudulent concealment—but failed to substantiate these claims adequately. For instance, he could not demonstrate that Goldengate acted outside its role as an employer or concealed knowledge of his injury from him.
Ultimately, the appellate judges Ashmann-Gerst, Lui, and Chavez affirmed the lower court's judgment of dismissal. They emphasized that without specific amendments proposed by Liu or new facts presented during appeal proceedings indicating possible errors in judgment or procedural missteps by the trial court, there was no basis for overturning the original decision.
The attorneys involved were Haoxiao Liu representing himself pro se and Gina E. Och from Murchison & Cumming LLP representing Goldengate Bus Inc. Judge Colin P. Leis presided over the initial trial under Case ID B320846.