Legal Opinion
Storm v. Industrial Accident Commission
California Supreme Court
Decided April 12, 1923No. S. F. No. 10323PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMyers, J.
Writ of review to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission. The essential facts found by the commission are as follows:
“1. R. D. Lindsay, applicant while employed as apprentice painter on February 13, 1922, at San Francisco, California, by defendant Floyd G. Storm, sustained injury occurring in the course of and arising out of his employment, as follows: while at work sandpapering the walls of an unoccupied dwelling which the employer was renovating under contract, the applicant sustained minor wounds and lost the sight of both his eyes by reason of the explosion of dynamite caps…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Whiting-Mead Commercial Co. v. Indus. Accident Comm'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Coronado Beach Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Haller v. City of LansingMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
- Rish v. Iowa Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1919
- Kimbol v. Industrial Acc. CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Madin v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Larson v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Newton v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Frigidaire Corp. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.