State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Industrial Accident Commission

39 P.2d 870, 3 Cal. App. 2d 532, 1935 Cal. App. LEXIS 312
California Court of Appeal·Decided January 9, 1935·No. Civ. No. 9947·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

CRAIL, J.

A. H. Christensen was injured while receiving work relief “as an open welfare case”. Except as to dates and names the facts are identical with those in the case of McBurney v. Industrial Acc. Com., 220 Cal. 124 [30 Pac. (2d) 414], Under the rule established in that case he was not an employee within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The contention, based on recent amendments to the act which are designated as sections 8(a) and 12*4, that because Christensen was required to work and received cash as part of said aid relief, he was an employee, is fully answered by the case of County of Los Angeles v. Industrial Acc. Com., 2 Cal. App. (2d) 614 [38 Pac. (2d) 828]. As Christensen was not an employee, he was not entitled under the law to compensation.

Award annulled.

Stephens, P. J., and Willis, J., pro tem., concurred.

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

State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Industrial Accident Commission, 39 P.2d 870, 3 Cal. App. 2d 532, 1935 Cal. App. LEXIS 312 (Cal. Ct. App. 1935).

39 P.2d 870 (State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Industrial Accident Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

County of Los Angeles v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
637 P.2d 681 (California Supreme Court, 1981)
City of Los Angeles v. Industrial Accident Commission
47 P.2d 1096 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)
State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Industrial Acc. Com.
3 Cal. App. 2d 532 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)