Legal Opinion

McBride v. Industrial Acc. Com.

California Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1920No. S. F. No. 9364PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The petition for a writ of review was denied in this matter upon the theory that the commission had the power to reserve, as it expressly did, the award for medical, surgical, and hospital treatment, to which it found the claimant entitled, pending the procuring of the necessary information and vouchers for a supplemental award. [1] The practice, perhaps, is not one to be commended, as a single final judgment covering all matters involved is the orderly method. It certainly could not be extended to allow supplemental awards for the purpose of correcting errors in the original award, as was…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Georgia Casualty Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bartlett Hayward Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Hindes v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  3. Grand Union Hotel v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Southern California Edison Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  5. Coombs v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API