Burton v. Union Oil Co.

19 P.2d 9, 129 Cal. App. 438
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedFebruary 3, 1933
DocketDocket No. 7306.
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 19 P.2d 9 (Burton v. Union Oil Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Burton v. Union Oil Co., 19 P.2d 9, 129 Cal. App. 438 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933).

Opinion

WORKS, P. J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries. Demurrer to the complaint was sustained without leave to amend and judgment accordingly went for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

The complainant alleged, in effect, that appellant was an employee of respondent, charged with the duty of operating an emery-wheel for the purpose of sharpening tools; that while appellant was engaged in the performance of this duty the revolving wheel, then being defective and unsafe, “flew into pieces and parts”, the pieces striking appellant in the face and inflicting certain specified injuries, whereby appellant was damaged in a specified amount. The demurrer was interposed upon the ground, among others, that the court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action. It was properly sustained without leave to amend. It is well settled that pursuant *439 to the terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act the Industrial Accident Commission has exclusive jurisdiction of such claims as that presented by the complaint. It is plain that appellant, an employee, was injured as the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.

Judgment affirmed.

Craig, J., and Stephens, J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Coleman v. Silverberg Plumbing Co.
263 Cal. App. 2d 74 (California Court of Appeal, 1968)
Sasser v. Miles & Sons Trucking Service
259 P.2d 488 (California Court of Appeal, 1953)
Walker v. City & County of San Francisco
219 P.2d 487 (California Court of Appeal, 1950)
Fox v. Swartz
36 N.W.2d 708 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1949)
Buttner v. American Bell Telephone Co.
107 P.2d 439 (California Court of Appeal, 1940)
Tipton v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
298 U.S. 141 (Supreme Court, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 P.2d 9, 129 Cal. App. 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burton-v-union-oil-co-calctapp-1933.