Legal Opinion

Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident Commission

California Supreme Court

Decided May 27, 1955No. L. A. 23298PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.

This controversy concerns the apportionment of liability between an employer and the Subsequent Injuries Fund. (Lab. Code, §§ 4750-4755.) The employe, Mrs. Harris, before her industrial injury had a permanent partial disability consisting of impairment of the motion of the spine, the result of tuberculosis of the spine which had become quiescent. The industrial injury from a fall, said to be “negligible” in itself, caused aggravation of the previously quiescent disease and, following various courses of treatment including surgery, a complete paralysis of both legs and of the body up to the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tanenbaum v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Edson v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Goodwill Industries of San Bernardino & Riverside Counties, Inc. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Dow Chemical Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Ferguson v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc. v. Subsequent Injury FundCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  5. State v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955

7 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