Legal Opinion
Urquiza v. Industrial Accident Commission
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 5, 1956No. Civ. 17044PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.
Petitioner seeks review and the annulment of an order of the Industrial Accident Commission determining that prior to an industrial injury he had no permanent disability entitling him to compensation from the Subsequent Injuries Fund.
Questions Presented
1. Does section 4751, Labor Code, 1 apply to an injured employee who suffers from a prior existing disease or physical condition which in no wise was work disabling?
2. Did the employer know of the preexisting injury?
Record
While working for the L. C. Smith Company petitioner received an industrial injury which cost him the sight of one eye. The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Claim of Baron v. Nobar Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
- Claim of Bellospirito v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
- Claim of Rice v. Williams & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ferguson v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- State v. Industrial Accident CommisionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- State of Calif. v. Industrial Acc. Com.California Court of Appeal · 1957
- Schlag v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958