Royal Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission
Before: Thompson
THOMPSON (IRA F.), J.
Petitioners ask this court to review an award of the Industrial Accident Commission rendered in favor of Peter Serna against Kahn Construction Company and its insurance carrier, Royal Indemnity Company. The Commission found that Serna had sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment by the Kahn Construction Company, caused by running a steel sliver into his right hand, resulting in infection.
The facts are as follows: On the dates December 22, 23, 26 and 27 of 1930 Serna was employed by the Kahn Construction Company, building contractors, in the capacity of laborer, his duties including that of assisting in the handling of steel plates about sixteen inches square and one or one and one-half inches thick, which were used in the construction of the building. While so engaged, according to the witness Martinez, who was working with him on December 27th, at about a quarter to 4 in the afternoon Serna said to him in Spanish, “I thought I got a sliver.” The witness was asked, “Did you understand him to say at that time that he got a sliver in his hand? A. Yes, sir. Q. That was on the last day that you worked together for the Kahn Construction Company? A. Yes.” 'The facts further show that on December 29, 1930, Serna entered the employ of Preston Brothers, subcontractors under the general contractor Kahn Construction Company; that while working for Preston Brothers his work consisted in the handling of bricks; that after working a while Serna noticed that the skin on the thumb of his right hand was worn down almost to the flesh, but that there was no wound and that the hand did not bleed; Serna testified that after working for Preston Brothers four hours or thereabouts he had soreness in both the thumb and wrist of his right hand; that he worked the
[384]
day following, his wrist being still sore, and that it began to swell. Serna then went to his home and stayed there until January 2d, when a doctor was sent for who immediately instructed that Serna be- taken to a hospital where he remained about six weeks, undergoing two operations on his hand while there.
Petitioners’ contention is that the evidence does not justify or support the findings of fact, and in particular* that the finding of fact that Serna sustained an injury on or about December 26th arising out of and in the course of his employment by Kahn Construction Company, is not supported by any substantial evidence.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)