National Auto. Ins. Co. v. Indstrial Acc. Com.

California Supreme Court Nov 23, 1943 No. L. A. No. 18724Published

Before: Shenk

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a general employer remains liable for workers' compensation benefits when it retains the right to control the employee and the power to hire or discharge them, regardless of contractual provisions attempting to shift sole liability to a special employer.

Issues

Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the commission's finding that the petitioner was a general employer liable for workers' compensation benefits.
Whether a contractual agreement between a general and special employer regarding liability can override the rights of claimants under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is the rule in this state that where both the general and the special employer exert some measure of control both are liable.”

23 Cal.2d 215 (1943) NATIONAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (a Corporation) et al., Petitioners,

INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION, FRANCES N. IVY et al., Respondents.

L. A. No. 18724. Supreme Court of California. In Bank.

Nov. 23, 1943. C. W. Bowers for Petitioners.

Everett A. Corten and Dan Murphy, Jr., for Respondents.

SHENK, J.

This is a proceeding to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission.

George Ivy met his death while employed to drive an oil truck and trailer which was sublet by Miller Oil Products to Pathfinder Petroleum Company. Ivy's widow and minor son applied for death benefits against both concerns. The commission found that both were employers, that both were subject to the Workmen's Compensation Act, and that they were jointly liable. An appropriate award was made in favor of the surviving dependents against Miller Oil Products as general employer, and Pathfinder Petroleum Company as special employer. The insurance carriers were held jointly liable for payment of the award and the employers were dismissed. National Automobile Insurance Company, carrier for Miller Oil Products, seeks to annul the order affecting its liability.

It is conceded that Ivy met his death in the course of his employment and from causes arising out of the employment; that his widow and minor son are entitled to any benefits awarded; and that Pathfinder Petroleum Company was an employer. [1a] The sole question presented is the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the finding and conclusion of the commission that Miller Oil Products was the general employer. If such evidence is in the record the conclusion that the petitioner is liable may not be disturbed. (Sec. 67(c), Workmen's Compensation Act; Western Indemnity Co. v. Pillsbury, 170 Cal. 686, 704 [151 P. 398]; F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 17 Cal.2d 634 [111 P.2d 313].)

The record shows the following: Miller Oil Products is a co-partnership, consisting of two Miller brothers, engaged in [217]

National Auto. Ins. Co. v. Indstrial Acc. Com.

AI Brief

L. A. No. 18724. Supreme Court of California. In Bank.

SHENK, J.

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief