Gray

Gray v. Industrial Accident Commission

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 202·34 Cal. App. 713·168 P. 702
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 1917Civ. No. 2275.California572 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

In support of the application for the writ it is urged first that the decedent, to whose dependents an award was made by the respondent, Industrial Accident Com mission, was guilty of willful misconduct in returning to the place from which he had been taken earlier in the day and where he ultimately met with the accident which caused his death. Now, the evidence shows that he was ordered to go from that place, where he was engaged in loading dirt on cars, to another place some little distance away. The evidence does not show that he was warned not to return to the place where he was originally working, nor does it show that it was explained to him what the dangers of the place were from which he was taken. He was simply told to go and work somewhere else. He went and worked for a while at the place indicated on the same character of which he had been doing; and later on, the work at that place becoming slack, or there not being any dirt to load, or some such reason, he went back to the place where he had been working earlier in-the morning, apparently with the intention of keeping employed where there was work to do. Now, there is no direct evidence—there was none before the…

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.