Argonaut Mining Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

California Court of Appeal May 2, 1951 No. Civ. 14738Published

Before: Nourse

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that in cases of occupational disease, the date of injury for determining applicable compensation rates is the date the disease results in compensable disability, rather than the date of last exposure. Consequently, applying the statutes in effect at the time of disability does not violate constitutional protections against retroactive legislation or contract impairment.

Issues

Whether the date of injury for occupational disease compensation is the date of last exposure or the date of resulting disability.
Whether applying 1948 compensation statutes to a claim involving exposure beginning in 1928 violates due process or the contract impairment clause.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the right to, and liability for, compensation established by the act are not founded upon contract, but are statutory rights and duties arising from the employer-employee relationship”

“the date of injury in cases of occupational diseases is that date upon which the employee first suffered disability therefrom”

“Until the disability there is no compensable injury. When the disease results in disability there then comes into existence for the first time a right in the petitioner to seek compensation.”

NOURSE, P. J.

Sabino Gonzalez filed an application with the Industrial Accident Commission on December 22, 1948, against petitioner and others. He alleged an injury arising out of and in the course of employment with petitioner, to wit, occupational silicosis. He had worked as a miner for petitioner and others from June, 1923, to December, 1928, exposed to silica hazards. Prom December, 1928, to August 20, 1948, he engaged in other occupations which did not expose him to silicosis. Gonzalez died before his case went to decision. His dependents then filed an application for an industrial death benefit, which claim was consolidated and heard with the disability claim. Respondent commission made an award on July 21, 1950, finding that on

November 23, 1948,

Gonzalez sustained a

compensable injury

consisting of silicosis which caused his death on April 9, 1949. An award was made jointly and severally against petitioner and others.

The death benefit and the accrued temporary indemnity were based upon the rates in effect according to the statutes of 1948. Based upon the statutes in existence in 1948, the total award was for $6,415.20. If the award were based upon the statutes in existence in 1928, petitioner alleges, the total award would have been for $4,334.85.

Petitioner’s contentions are twofold. (1) Due process is violated because retroactive effect is given to the 1948 statutes. (2) The commission’s award violates the contract impairment clause of the California and United States Constitutions in not following the law in effect in 1928. It concedes that the application was timely filed and that the case is compensable.

With respect to the constitutional inhibition against

[29]

the legislative impairment of the obligation of contracts, petitioner’s position is summarized in the following language: “At the time Gonzalez was hired by your petitioner, the parties dealt in contemplation of the statutes in existence in 1928. The statutes in existence at that time became an integral part of the contract of employment. ’ ’ In support of this contention petitioner cites

Argonaut Mining Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

AI Brief

NOURSE, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief