 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Classified Postings in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission3/19/1943
SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA IN BANK
S.F. No. 16828.
1943.CA.40127 ; 21 Cal. 2d 742; 135 P.2d 153
March 19, 1943
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY (A CORPORATION), PETITIONER,
v.
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION, LOVINE GEORGE ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
PROCEEDING to review orders of the Industrial Accident Commission awarding compensation for personal injuries. Awards affirmed.
R. P. Wisecarver for Petitioner.
Everett A. Corten and Dan Murphy, Jr., for Respondents
Griffin
GRIFFIN, J. pro tem. This is a proceeding to review an award of compensation by the Industrial Accident Commission in favor of certain employees working in shipyards of petitioner who had contracted the contagious eye disease known as kerato conjunctivitis. Separate awards were made to ten employees of petitioner who had contracted kerato conjunctivitis. The cases were consolidated for this proceeding. The commission made the following finding as to the employees: that each "while employed . . . during the month of December, 1941, at San Francisco, California, by Bethlehem Steel Company, Shipbuilding Division, sustained injury arising out of and in the course of his employment as follows: while working in the shipyards of defendant . . . contracted a contagious disease known as kerato conjunctivitis, which was then epidemic in the shipyards of said defendant . . . ."
Petitioner contends that the claimants failed to prove that the disease they acquired was acquired by reason of their employment in the shipyards and that the findings and evidence are insufficient to support the awards. It is not disputed that the extent of the disease among shipyard workers amounted to an epidemic. Petitioner contends, however, that the proof was conclusive that the disease was also epidemic in San Francisco and other places and that there has been a complete failure to prove that the disease was contracted by claimants during and because of their employment. The commission asserts that although there were many cases of the disease among the public, there is nothing in the record to show that the same proportion as in the shipyards was affected; that if the disease was of epidemic proportions among the general public the burden of proof as to this fact lies with the employer, because it is an affirmative defense and the burden is upon the one asserting the affirmative of the issue, citing Labor Code section 5705. There is no merit to this last contention. That section provides that the burden of proof rests upon the party holding the affirmative of the issue. The section then lists certain affirmative defenses in which the burden of proof rests upon the employer. The contentions of the commission cannot be brought within any of those specific affirmative defenses.
In Pattiani v. Industrial Acc. Com., 199 Cal. 596, 600-601 [250 P. 864, 49 A.L.R. 446], it was held, as it must be held
here, that where an employee contracts a contagious or infectious disorder he must, in order to recover compensation, establish the fact that he was subjected to some special exposure in excess of that of the commonalty, and in the absence of such showing, the illness cannot be said to have been proximately caused from an injury arising out of his employment. To the same effect are Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 19 Cal. 2d 622
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 California Classifieds
Classified Postings
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Classified Postings in your area.
|
|