Zenith National Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.
The present proceeding to review a compensation award requires us to determine the scope of the so-called going and coming rule, which excludes from the coverage of the Workmen’s Compensation Act the time spent by *946employees in transit between their homes and their jobs. A long-recognized exception to this rule authorizes compensation when the employer has undertaken to defray the travel expenses of his employees under certain circumstances. We hold that respondent Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Board properly found that the travel involved here lies within the scope of the exception; wc…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cardillo v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Kobe v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- California Casualty Indemnity Exchange v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Trussless Roof Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Hinman v. Westinghouse Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1970
- Hinojosa v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Smith v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- H. K. Ferguson Co. v. WilleyWyoming Supreme Court · 1977
- Santa Rosa Junior College v. Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.