> >
Case Name | Tate v. IAC | |
---|---|---|
Date | 10/19/1953 | |
Note | On rehearing, petitioner for rehearing may raise any point he could have raised in original hearing. | |
Citation | 120 Cal.App.2d 657 | |
WCC Citation | WCC 26961953 CA |
On rehearing it developed that the district manager of the employer not only knew that Tate was drinking, but participated with Tate in the drinking and purchased at least one round of drinks. The facts, in more detail, are as follows: Ernest Tate was employed as a janitor and supervising employee by the American Building Maintenance Company, a self-insured employer. The employer raised the affirmative defense that death was caused by the intoxication of Tate. Tate then made a telephone call and he and Deardorff left Allison's home for San Francisco at 2:30 a. m. Allison stated he did not believe that Tate was then drunk, or he would not have allowed him to leave. Allison also stated that Tate had worked for this same employer for seven or eight years; that about three or four months before the accident Tate had been warned about four to six times about drinking on the job.
Download full case here.
Download full case here.