Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*59Opinion
MOSK, J.
The question we are called upon to determine is whether Helen L. Talcott (hereinafter called respondent) is barred from recovering benefits from the Subsequent Injuries Fund (hereinafter the Fund) because she filed an application for compensation benefits against her employer within one year after the date of her injury but failed to proceed against the Fund within five years of that date.
Section 4750 of the Labor Code1 provides that if a workman who has a permanent physical impairment later sustains a compensable injury resulting in permanent disability, the employer is not…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Fruehauf Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- State, Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Acc. Com.California Court of Appeal · 1957
- Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Franklin v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- General Foundry Service v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Baker v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Zurich Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Nolan v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.