Legal Opinion
Whiting-Mead Commercial Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 9, 1924No. Civ. No. 4845PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.
Petition for a writ of certiorari to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission.
It appears therefrom that the State Compensation Insurance Fund, a state instrumentality, is the insurance carrier of the Whiting Mead Commercial Company. On June 18, 1923, one Ernest A. Wells sustained injuries by being pinned between an automobile truck and the side of a building, and he subsequently filed his application with the Industrial Accident Commission for the purpose of obtaining benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Stats. 1913, p. 279), and he averred that his injury arose out of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Western Indemnity Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Barton v. Studebaker Corp. of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Flickenger v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Stephens v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith Bros., Inc. v. O'BryanTexas Supreme Court · 1936
- Hammel v. KeehnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937