Legal Opinion

Hendy v. Losse

California Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1991No. S018325PublishedCited by 123 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BAXTER, J.

Review was granted in this matter to determine the effect, if any, of a 1982 amendment of Labor Code section 3602, 1 on the right of a person who suffers an industrial injury to sue a coemployee physician whose treatment allegedly aggravated the injury. The Court of Appeal held that while section 3602, as amended, no longer permits actions against a physician employer under the “dual capacity” doctrine, a coemployee action may be maintained under section 3601.

We disagree. While the Court of Appeal was correct in its conclusion that section 3601 alone governs the right of an…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Goodman v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Shoemaker v. MyersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Cole v. Fair Oaks Fire Protection DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  5. S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial RelationsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by123 opinions

  1. Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2013
  2. City of Atascadero v. Merill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
  3. Lazar v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. Torres v. Parkhouse Tire Service, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  5. McKell v. Washington Mutual, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006

118 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