Robles v. Industrial Commission of Utah

• Decision Date: 12 March 1931
• Docket Number: 5078
• Citation: 296 P. 600,77 Utah 408
• Court: Utah Supreme Court
• Parties: ROBLES v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF UTAH et al

296 P. 600

77 Utah 408

ROBLES v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF UTAH et al

No. 5078

Supreme Court of Utah

March 12, 1931

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Mercedes Tejada Robles for the death of Remigio Robles, her son, opposed by the Southern Pacific Company, employer. To review an order of the Industrial Commission denying compensation, the claimant filed application for writ of review.

AFFIRMED.

A. M Moore and Soren X. Christensen, both of San Francisco, Cal for plaintiff.

Bagley, Judd & Ray, of Salt Lake City, and George P. Parker, Atty. Gen., for defendants.

CHERRY, C. J. STRAUP, ELIAS HANSEN, FOLLAND, and EPHRAIM HANSON, JJ., concur.

OPINION

CHERRY, C. J.

Ramigio Robles was killed by accident in the course of his employment by the Southern Pacific Company at Lucin, Utah, on October 4, 1928. His mother, the plaintiff herein, a resident of Mexico, claiming to have been dependent upon her deceased son for her support, applied to the Industrial Commission for compensation on account of his accidental death. Her application was denied, and the Industrial Commission, upon a finding that there were no dependents of the deceased employee, ordered the employer to pay $ 975.31 into the state treasury as provided in such cases by section 3140, Comp. Laws 1917, as amended by Laws 1921, c. 67, the Workmen's Compensation Act. The plaintiff has brought the case here by writ of review, contending that the Industrial Commission, under the evidence, was bound in law to find that she was a dependant of the deceased and entitled to compensation.

The only question in dispute before the Industrial Commission was the dependency of the plaintiff. Other essentials to compensation were admitted. With the consent of the parties and upon the order of the commission, a hearing was had at Los Angeles, Cal., before the Industrial Accident Commission of California, on December 27, 1929, at which a brother of the deceased workman gave testimony consisting entirely of hearsay that the deceased for several years before his death had been making contributions to his mother's support. Upon the grounds that the proof of dependency consisted entirely of hearsay evidence, the commission on January 24, 1930, denied the plaintiff's application. On February 13, 1930, a petition for rehearing was presented to the commission, which was denied on April 29, 1930. On May 5, 1930, there were filed with the...