Royal Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

This matter comes to us upon a writ of review. It is contended first that the evidence before the Industrial Accident Commission did not warrant a finding that G. W. Rollins sustained an injury by bumping his knee against a gate upon the ranch on which he was working, which injury caused a slight wound," followed by a severe infection. We shall not review the evidence here. It is true that the nature of the injury, the facts and circumstances surrounding .the same, and the symptoms which followed made it impossible to demonstrate, beyond the possibility of a doubt, the exact cause of the infection which resulted in most severe and lengthy illness for applicant Rollins. But such demonstration was not required. There is medical testimony in the record sufficient to sustain the award and that being true, we are not concerned with the conflicting testimony introduced before the Commission. (Southern Pac. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 177 Cal. 378 [ 170 Pac. 820 ]; General Accident, etc., v. Industrial Acc. Com., 186 Cal. 653 [ 200 Pac. 419 ].)

The only other point raised is that the Industrial Accident Commission erred in allowing compensation after August 1, 1924, as it appears from…