Legal Opinion
Madin v. Industrial Accident Commission
California Supreme Court
Decided February 3, 1956No. L. A. 23872PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.
Petitioners Madin and his insurance carrier seek the annulment of an award of workmen’s compensation to James Richardson and Lethia Richardson, his wife.
At the time hereinafter mentioned, Madin owned certain premises with 14 rental units and the Eichardsons were living in one of these rental units. Madin employed the Eichardsons to act as caretakers and managers of the property and collect the rent. They were on duty 24 hours a day and were available to meet any problems that arose during those hours. For this they received 10 per cent of the rentals and a discount on the rent of the unit…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Arizona Employers' Liability CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Richardson v. HamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Colonial Insurance v. Industrial Accident CommisionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Coronado Beach Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Haddenham v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1976
- Granado v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Wiseman v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.California Court of Appeal · 1967
- Albertson's, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.