Cardoza v. Pillsbury

145 P. 1015, 169 Cal. 106, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 468
California Supreme Court·Decided January 5, 1915·No. S.F. No. 7262.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The application for a review by this court of the proceedings of the Industrial Accident Commission of the state of California states no ground upon which this court is authorized to entertain the same. The grounds stated, — namely, that the findings of the commission are not sustained by the evidence, and that the applicant has discovered new evidence material to him, are grounds upon which the commission itself may grant a rehearing (Workmen's Compensation Act, sec. 82), but the courts are restricted to the grounds stated in section 84 of said act.

The application for a writ is denied for these reasons. *Page 107

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

Cardoza v. Pillsbury, 145 P. 1015, 169 Cal. 106, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 468 (Cal. 1915).

145 P. 1015 (Cardoza v. Pillsbury) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Clendaniel v. Industrial Accident Commission
111 P.2d 314 (California Supreme Court, 1941)
G. L. Eastman Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.
200 P. 17 (California Supreme Court, 1921)