S. A. Gerrard Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

California Supreme Court Feb 19, 1941 No. L. A. 17668Published

Before: Edmonds

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the S. A. Gerrard Company was the employer of the claimant because it retained the right to exercise complete and authoritative control over the operations of the grower, W. Hanaoka, rendering him an employee rather than an independent contractor.

Issues

Whether the claimant was an employee of the S. A. Gerrard Company at the time of his injury.
Whether the grower, W. Hanaoka, was an independent contractor or an employee of the S. A. Gerrard Company.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In form he was an independent contractor; in effect he was an employee of the Gerrard Company and its right to control his operations extended to all of the persons who worked for him in raising and picking the crop.”

“Also, the right to control, rather than the amount of control which was exercised, is the determinative factor.”

EDMONDS, J.

The proceedings in which the Industrial Accident Commission made an award of compensation in favor of Macerio Valdez are before this court upon the return to a writ of

certiorari

issued by the District Court of Appeal. The only question for decision is whether Valdez, at the time he was injured, was an employee of the petitioner S. A. Gerrard Company. The award against the petitioner and State Compensation Insurance Fund, its insurance carrier, is based upon findings that it was the special employer of Valdez.

At the time of the accident, the respondent W. Hanaoka had leased land from the Gerrard Company and was growing melons upon it. He employed Valdez as a picker. The agreement between the Gerrard Company and Hanaoka for the use of this land was stated in three written contracts. One of these was a lease which provided that the land was to be used for the purpose of growing crops of cantaloupes, honeydews or honeyballs as the Gerrard Company might direct, and that the provisions of a contemporaneously executed distributing agreement and of a crop mortgage, were a part of it.

By the distributing agreement, W. Hanaoka appointed the Gerrard Company as his exclusive agent to perform all engine work necessary to prepare the fields for planting; to haul the melons to its packing shed; to sort, pack and load the melons on cars and trucks; and to market and distribute them. Hanaoka agreed to prepare the premises for planting; to plant the same with the kind and variety of melons as directed by the Gerrard Company; to care for the melons until their maturity; to pick and gather them into field centers; and to load them on the Gerrard Company’s trucks. Another provision was that all picking should be done under the supervision of and in accordance with the direction of the Gerrard Company. Hanaoka agreed, also, to hire from the Gerrard Company any mules he needed and to purchase all feed from it. He also agreed to furnish all labor, materials, and equipment; to care for equipment of the Gerrard Company; to purchase all seed necessary for the growing of the crops from it; and to pay a proportionate part of its advertising costs. ,

[413]

The Gerrard Company agreed to sell the seed without warranty or

S. A. Gerrard Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

AI Brief

EDMONDS, J.

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief