Legal Opinion
Heard v. Board of Administration
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 28, 1940No. Civ. No. 12550PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
From a judgment denying them the status of “employees” of the city of Los Angeles plaintiffs appeal.
Plaintiffs have for some time been owners of trucks which for definite compensations thej»- drove for the city of Los Angeles. Herman entered the city service in 1911. At first *688he furnished a team to be used on a grader which he operated under the supervision of the foreman while another man drove the horses. This he continued for six years, receiving his pay twice a month on a daily rate. In 1917 he purchased a truck to haul materials for the street department, where he was again under the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hillen v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- City of Pasadena v. CharlevilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Boyd v. City of Sierra MadreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Dep't of Water & Power of L.A. v. Indus. Accident Comm'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Campbell v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Campbell v. Board of Civil Service CommissionersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Holmgren v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Ticknor v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Snow v. Board of AdministrationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.