Contractors I. Exch. v. Indus. Acc. Com.

Certiorari for the purpose of having determined the lawfulness of a certain order and award made by the Industrial Accident Commission.

The record discloses the following facts:

Judge King, aged fifty-one years, was on or about November 29, 1923, employed as a laborer by the Hutchinson Lumber Company at Oroville, California.

On the date last mentioned he sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment when he was struck by a piece of lumber proximately causing injury of a serious nature, to his hip and back. Both employer and employee were subject to the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act (Stats. 1913, p. 279).

Petitioner Contractors Indemnity Exchange was the insurance carrier of the employer. On May 28, 1924, King filed an application with the respondent Commission for compensation benefits, reciting that Contractors Indemnity Exchange had stopped payments on March 5, 1924, because of his alleged refusal to submit to an operation.

Hearings were held on June 13, 1924, at Oroville, and on August 12, 1924, at San Francisco, at which times medical reports relating to the injuries of the employee were filed.

Upon said hearings and medical reports the Commission entered its findings and award on August 27, 1924. It found that King was still wholly disabled from labor on account of his injury and awarded temporary total disability payments until the termination of such disability or the further order of the Commission.

No rehearing was asked for.

On October 21, 1924, Contractors Indemnity Exchange filed a petition with respondent Commission reciting that inasmuch as King had testified at the hearing on August 12, *Page 352 1924, that he was able to do some light work, petitioner had directed him to report to the employer at Oroville immediately and that light work would be supplied him. It was further stated in the petition that King had not reported to the Hutchinson Lumber Company as requested and was not attempting to do light work of any kind, and petitioner further claimed that since August 12, 1924, King had been able to do this character of work.

The petition came on for hearing on November 19, 1924. King was the only witness at the hearing. He testified, in effect, that since the last hearing in the case he had done some light work around his home, and that while his condition was improving he could not stoop without suffering pain nor could he lift anything that was heavy. He further testified that he would be glad to try to do light work, and that he had presented himself to the lumber company by whom he had been employed, and also another company and asked for work, but had been unable to obtain any.