Legal Opinion

Sutter Butte Canal Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

California Supreme Court

Decided January 6, 1953No. Sac. 6308PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.

Petitioner-employer, a corporation, seeks annulment of an award of increased benefits based upon a finding of respondent Industrial Accident Commission that *140the death of one of petitioner’s employes was caused by the employer’s serious and wilful misconduct. (See Lab. Code, § 4553.) We have concluded that the award cannot be sustained, in that the evidence is insufficient to establish the minimum elements of serious and wilful misconduct as those elements are enunciated in Mercer-Fraser Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (1953), ante, p. 102 [251 P.2d 955], and cases there cited, and that the award…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mercer - Fraser Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Ethel D. Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Seidler v. GoodspeedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Simmons Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission & TringaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  5. Camicia v. CamiciaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. R. L. Keeley v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Bigge Crane & Rigging Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  3. Holm v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Grason Electric Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  5. Grason Electric Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

11 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