Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento — appointed by Edmund Gerald Brown
Malone v. Bula Malone
Idaho Supreme Court · 1942-10-27 · cited 19×
This case involved a divorce action between a husband and wife, each of whom owned separate real property before marriage; the husband sought divorce on grounds of extreme cruelty, and the wife cross-complained on the same ground while also contesting property rights and seeking alimony. The trial court granted the wife a divorce, confirmed the parties' pre-marriage real estate as separate property, classified an 80-acre parcel purchased after marriage as the husband's separate property (subject to reimbursement of $2,000 in community funds used to pay a mortgage), divided the remaining community assets and debts equally, and awarded the wife temporary alimony of $110 per month followed by permanent alimony of $50 per month. On appeal, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed, holding that income from separate property remains separate and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in the amount or duration of alimony given the parties' circumstances and the statutory directive to consider their respective financial situations. The court rejected the wife's claim that the purchased land had become community property and found the alimony award adequate under the governing statute.
family lawproperty
Hepp v. Ader
Idaho Supreme Court · 1942-10-22 · cited 35×
This case arose from a head-on car collision allegedly caused by the defendants' negligent driving around a curve, which killed Jeannette Hepp and destroyed her husband's vehicle. Her surviving husband and one daughter sued the owners and driver of the other car for damages, including loss of companionship and funeral expenses under Idaho's wrongful death statute, while the other daughter was named as a defendant after refusing to join. The jury awarded the husband $10,525 and the daughter $1,500; on appeal, the defendants challenged jury instructions and claimed the verdicts were excessive. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the instructions correctly stated the law, that no prejudicial error occurred, and that the damage awards did not reflect passion, prejudice, or abuse of discretion.
torts & liabilityprocedure
Bigley v. Smite
Idaho Supreme Court · 1942-09-25 · cited 8×
The case involved a claim for workers' compensation by an employee injured while repairing buildings owned by his employer, Mrs. Smith, doing business as Blue Arrow Cafe. The Industrial Accident Board awarded compensation to the claimant, but the State Insurance Fund appealed, asserting among other points that the employment was casual and therefore excluded from coverage. Under Idaho Code Annotated sec. 43-904, casual employment is not covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Law unless the employer has elected in writing to apply the law's provisions. The court found the employment was irregular and contingent on uncertain repair needs, with the employee also working for others, and that no such election had been made. It therefore held the employment casual, reversed the award, and did not address the remaining assignments of error.
labor & employment
Kaonis v. Ohio Match Co.
Idaho Supreme Court · 1942-07-10 · cited 5×
The case involved a workers' compensation claim filed after employee Kaonis died suddenly from heart failure while performing strenuous log-decking duties for Ohio Match Company following a period of inactivity. The majority of the court denied compensation on the grounds that the death was not shown to be caused by an accident arising out of employment. This dissenting opinion argues for reversal and an award, reasoning that under Idaho precedents an unexpected death during habitual but physically demanding work qualifies as a compensable accident if employment exertion aggravated a latent condition, and that proof of causation need only meet a preponderance standard rather than exclude all other possibilities.
labor & employment
Barker v. Russell & Pugh Lumber Co.
Idaho Supreme Court · 1942-07-07 · cited 4×
In this case, a worker was injured when a saw log fell on him while he was loading a truck and sought workers' compensation benefits from a lumber company and its surety, along with related medical providers, alleging the injury occurred during his employment. The industrial accident board found that the worker was an independent contractor rather than an employee and denied the claim. The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the board's order on appeal, holding that substantial evidence supported the finding of independent contractor status based on conflicting testimony about who arranged the work and payment terms. The court further reasoned that independent contractors are not entitled to benefits under the state's workmen's compensation law.
labor & employment
Cragg v. Cook Cedar Co.
Idaho Supreme Court · 1942-07-07 · cited 12×
The case involved a widow seeking workers' compensation benefits after her husband died in an accident on June 24, 1941, while working on cedar pole production for Cook Cedar Company. The Industrial Accident Board denied the claim after finding that the deceased was not an employee but part of a partnership acting as an independent contractor. The court affirmed the denial, holding that the evidence established the deceased and his partner entered an agreement to manufacture and deliver poles, received advances from the company for expenses and labor, employed other workers, and operated without company control over the work methods. Because the deceased was determined to be an independent contractor rather than an employee, no compensation was available under the workmen's compensation law. The court found it unnecessary to address other issues raised on appeal.
labor & employment