STATE COMPENSATION INS FUND v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION (1935)

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND et al. v. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION et al.

Civ. 9947.

Decided: January 09, 1935

F. Britton McConnell, of Los Angeles, for petitioners. Everett A. Corten, of San Francisco, for respondents.

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 Accident Commission, 220 Cal. 124, 30 P.(2d) 414. Under the rule established in that case, he was not an employee within the meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Act (St. 1917, p. 831, as amended). The contention, based on recent amendments to the act which are designated as sections 8(a) and 121/212 (St. 1933, pp. 2613, 2615), 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 Los Angeles County v. Industrial Accident Commission and Jones (Cal. App.) 38 P.(2d) 828. As Christensen was not an employee, he was not entitled under the law to compensation.

Award annulled.

CRAIL, Justice.

We concur: STEPHENS, P. J.; WILLIS, Justice pro tem.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network