Zenith National Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

Good Law
1967 Cal. LEXIS 356·59 Cal. Rptr. 622·66 Cal. 2d 944·428 P.2d 606·32 Cal. Comp. Cases 236
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 23, 1967L. A. No. 29322California2,147 words

Opinion

dissent Opinion

McComb, J.

I dissent. I would annul the award for the reasons expressed by Mr. Justice pro tern. McCoy in the opinion prepared by him for the Court of Appeal in Zenith National Ins. Co. v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Board (Cal. App.) 54 Cal.Rptr. 696 .

Petitioners’ application for a rehearing was denied July 19, 1967.

lead Opinion

Tobriner, J.

The present proceeding to review a compensation award requires us to determine the scope of the so-called going and coming rule, which excludes from the coverage of the Workmen’s Compensation Act the time spent by *946 employees in transit between their homes and their jobs. A long-recognized exception to this rule authorizes compensation when the employer has undertaken to defray the travel expenses of his employees under certain circumstances. We hold that respondent Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Board properly found that the travel involved here lies within the scope of the exception; wc therefore affirm the award.

Applicant, Lawrence Alvin De Carmo, sustained serious injuries in an automobile accident while en route to a remote construction site. The evidence before respondent board established that applicant, a bricktender, was employed by petitioner Smiley Steel Construction Company at a job site which was 130 miles from his home in the Los Angeles area, that in order to induce applicant and other employees to accept such employment their employer paid them $10 a day "to cover transportation costs and living expenses,” that it was the practice of the employees, well known…

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.