Lucas v. Industrial Accident Commission
Before: Sturtevant
STURTEVANT, J.
This is an application for a writ of review in which the petitioner asks that an award heretofore made by the Industrial Accident Commission be annulled. The facts are brief. The petitioner was the only witness examined orally. There was only one additional piece of evidence and that was the medical report.
In his application filed with the defendant board the petitioner alleged that on November 24, 1931, he was employed as a laborer at Oakland by Rosenberg Bros., and that while so employed he was injured by being hit in the groin and ruptured on the right side. At the hearing had before the defendant board the witness testified that at the time of the accident he was pulling on the handles of a freight truck and there was another man pushing; that he backed into a post and he was struck by the handle of the truck; that the handle hit him in the right groin; that it did not hurt much at the time, but it started hurting after—about ten minutes after; that about half an hour after the accident the petitioner took down his clothes and examined the spot; that at that time he found a lump—a little lump which he touched with his hand; that it was “sore like anything at that time”; and that before that time he had not had that lump. The medical report was as follows:
‘1 Gentlemen:
“Mr. Frank Lucas, a Portuguese, married, 30 years of age, and employed as a laborer by Rosenberg Bros., reported to our office at about 3.00 p. m. on November 24, 1931 giving the following history.
“History: The alleged injury occurred today, November 24, at about 9:00 a. m. At that time while at work pulling on the handles of a freight truck, and with another man pushing on the opposite end of the truck, he backed into a post, the handle of the truck striking him in the right groin. Following the accident he had some slight dull pain in the right groin. He did not become sick to his stomach or
[669]
nauseated. He did not stop working. At about 9:30 the patient had to defecate and he took occasion to examine himself when he found a swelling in the right groin about the size of a walnut.” If we pause at this point and look at the facts recited, it is patent that a
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)