Legal Opinion

Hatheway v. Industrial Accident Commission

California Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1939No. L. A. 17063PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This ease presents but one question: Does the finding of respondent commission that the industrial, compensable injury sustained by Jack Hodgkinson was caused by the serious and wilful misconduct of the employer, petitioner Earle M. Hatheway, find any substantial support in the record?

The record discloses that the injury was received by Hodgkinson on July 28, 1937, at petitioner’s garage, where the injured employee had been working as a mechanic for a period of five or six months prior to the accident; that at this garage some twenty-five or thirty persons were employed; that…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Burns's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. Ethel D. Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. E. Clemens Horst Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Gordon v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Beckles's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Hale v. MorganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. California Casualty Indemnity Exchange v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Cal. Cas. Ind. Exch. v. Industrial Acc. Com.California Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Parkhurst v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission & SeaquistCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945

17 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