Chance

Chance v. Industrial Accident Commission

Good Law
127 Cal. App. 391·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 385·15 P.2d 875
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1932Docket No. 8694.California935 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Spence, J.

Petitioner seeks to annul the award of the respondent Commission denying his application for compensation.

On March 31, 1932, petitioner was examined at Mount Zion Hospital and advised that he had a bilateral rupture. An operation was performed and thereafter petitioner sought compensation. The evidence showed that in March, 1932, petitioner had gone to his doctor and complained of pain in his abdomen. Petitioner believed that he had appendicitis. He was examined and found to be normal physically. Shortly thereafter he went to another doctor, who examined him and gave some prescriptions. In neither instance did petitioner advise the doctor that he had suffered any injury or strain, nor did he complain of any swelling. Neither doctor made any finding of hernia. Petitioner continued his work until March 31, 1932. He made no mention of any injury or strain when examined on that date, but after ascertaining that he had a hernia and being operated upon he thought back to a time early in March' when he was lifting some wet cotton on a fork into a tank and attributed his condition to that incident of lifting the cotton.

Petitioner had been employed by the Pacific Pelt Company for many…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.