Legal Opinion
Smith v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 7, 1975No. Civ. 34515PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RATTIGAN, Acting P. J.
In a decision after reconsideration, respondent board denied petitioner Paul Smith’s application for benefits claimed to be due him, under the workmen’s compensation law, by reason of an injury alleged to have been incurred in the course of his employment by respondent City of Oakland (hereinafter “the city,” or “respondent city”).
Facts
Petitioner became employed by the city as a fireman in June 1946, and worked full-time as such until 1971. In or before that year (but in any event by July 1, 1971), he became disabled as the result of an industrially caused back…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Laeng v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Turner v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- City & County of San Francisco v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Johnson v. Contra Costa County Fire Protection DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- City & County of SF v. Ind. Acc. Com.California Court of Appeal · 1956
3Cited by4 opinions
- Saal v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- California Highway Patrol v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Mannetter v. County of MarinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Zipton v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990