Sturdivant v. Pillsbury
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Certiorari to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission of the State of California. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This is an original proceeding in review under the Workmen’s Compensation, Insurance and Safety Act. A decision in the companion case of Carstens v. Pillsbury, ante, p. 572, [158 Pac. 218], has this day been filed. The only difference between the two cases is that in this case Sturdivant, the general contractor, is the petitioner, and that he was named in the application for relief made by Silva to the commission, and that notice was duly served upon him. So far as the question of due process of law is concerned, he has no cause of complaint, except that some evidence was taken in his absence…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Carstens v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
3Cited by13 opinions
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Porter v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 1957
- Employers' L. A. Corp. v. Indus. Acc. Com.California Supreme Court · 1918
- Hard v. Hollywood Turf ClubCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Thaxter v. FinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.