Legal Opinion

Danziger v. Industrial Accident Commission

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 17, 1930No. Docket No. 7462PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCraig, J.

The petitioner was injured in the course of employment. Upon application to the Industrial Accident Commission for adjustment of his claim, stating that he had asked for an operation and for a truss to relieve a hernia, it was found and awarded that he be compensated by a surgical operation with necessary incidental medical and hospital treatment and a weekly allowance for temporary disability. The applicant having refused surgical treatment when tendered, a petition to terminate liability was filed, which, following a hearing and repeated refusals to submit thereto, was granted. Upon a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Strong v. Sonken-Galamba Iron & Metal Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1921
  3. Smith v. Indus. Accident Comm'n of Cal.California Court of Appeal · 1915

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Martin v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Flores v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  3. Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Industrial Accident Commission & McClureCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  4. Dahl v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation BureauNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Gallegos v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API