Contracts · MBE-tested
LOS ANGELES SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK COMPANY (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION et al., Respondents
57 Cal. App. 792·District Court of Appeal of the State of California·1922·CA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
[Civ. No. 3824.
Second Appellate District, Division Two.
April 15, 1922.]
LOS ANGELES SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK COMPANY (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION et al., Respondents.
Employee and Employee—■ Employment Under Nonmarittme Contract—Statutory Liability for Injury.—Award affirmed on authority of Los Angeles Shipbuilding $■ Drydoclc Co. v. Industrial Aoo. Com., ante, p. 352.
PROCEEDING in Certiorari to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission. Affirmed.
The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in Los Angeles Shipbuilding <& Drydock Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., ante, p. 352.
Louis M. Lissner for Petitioner.
A. E. Graupner and Warren H. Pillsbury for Respondents.
[MAJORITY — FINLAYSON, P. J.]
FINLAYSON, P. J.
This is a proceeding in certiorari to review the award of the Industrial Accident Commission in favor of one J. M. Bush. The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in Los Angeles Shipbuilding & Drydock Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., ante, p. 352 [207 Pac. 417]. The opinion in that ease disposes of the fundamental questions involved here, and the award of the commission is, therefore, affirmed.
Works, J., and Craig, J., concurred.
A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on June 12, 1922.
All the Justices concurred.