Computation of, etc.-To justify award there must be sufficient competent
evidence to support every jurisdictional fact essentially involved in appli-
cation for compensation. Elk Grove Union Hight School Dist. v. Indus-
trial Acc. Commission of State of California-In re Hoag (Cal.)..
Computation of, etc.-Where board approves agreement under Section 57, pro-
viding that employer and injured may agree upon compensation, it may
be given same effect as award. In re Stone (Ind.)..
Computation of, etc.-Under Workmen's Compensation Law, Section 15, subd.
3, prior to its amendment in 1916 compensation could not be awarded for
permanent loss of use of a finger as for the loss of the finger, but only
66 2/3 per cent of the difference between the weekly wages and the wage-
earning capacity after the accident, not exceeding the compensation for
loss of finger. In re Sugg-Sugg vs. Erie R. Co. (N. Y.).
257
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.com.pe/books/content?id=Kg4WAAAAYAAJ&output=html_text&pg=PT16&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&q=editions:UOM39015065180872&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U3flN7kY8ca9hC7Hl5lFxBwptAA8w&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=218,451,7,7)
Computation of, etc.-On an appeal from an award of the Industrial Commis-
sion, no presumption safeguarded its finding that injury to index finger
was equivalent to loss of finger, where there was evidence that finger was
permanently stiff there was no evidence that this rendered it useless or
destroyed its efficiency. Injured finger is not lost, if it can fulfill its
normal and natural functions to a degree fair and worth considering, in
any work to which claimant is adopted mentally and physically-award
on the basis of 66 2/3 per cent of difference in earning capacity. In
re Supple-Supple vs. Erie R. Co. (N. Y.) ...
259
Computation of, etc.-Where claimant's employment is more or less irregular
the proper method of determining annual earning for purposes of compu-
tation is to take 300 times the average daily wages or salary, earned
during days employed. Riley v. Mason Motor Co. et al. (Mich.)........ 406
Computation of Compensation.-Where employee from one accident sustains a
permanent partial disability, as by loss of an arm or impairment of its use,
and also temporary total disability from fracture of sacrum or femur,
section 31 of Workmen's Compensation Act, governing compensation for
a permanent total disability, does not bar him from securing additional
compensation based on temporary total disability, governed by section 29.
In re Denton-In re Good (Ind.).....
69
Computation of Compensation.-When the trial judge finds there was a 50 per
cent loss of usefulness of each hand and 10 per cent of usefulness of one
eye, he should then find what percentage to total and permanent disability
the combined 50 per cent loss of usefulness of two hands and 10 per cent
of one eye make and should then award as compensation that percentage
of 400 weeks. It is not strictly a mathematical problem. It is not to be
solved by adding up the fractional parts, but upon the basis of percentage
of total and permanent disability reasonably found to be produced by
the several injuries considered collectively and with due regard to their
cumulative effect. Orlando v. F. Ferguson & Son (N. J.)
Computation of Compensation.-Section 31 of the Workmen's Compensation Act
fixing compensation for a finger, thumb, and whole hand, and other specific
injuries, and in "other cases of permanent partial disability" as deter-
mined by the board not to exceed 200 weeks, is mandatory as to the
specific injury stated; but where two or more fingers are lost the amount
will not be arrived at by multiplying the allowance for one finger, but
will be fixed by the board under the general clause, because otherwise
compensation for the loss of thumb and four fingers would exceed that
of a whole hand, which would be absurd. In re Maranovitch (Ind.)... 62
Computation of Compensation.-Under section 2 of the Workmen's Compensa-
tion Act in the case of a partial but permanent loss of usefulness of both
hands, or arms, or feet, or legs, or eyes or any two thereof, the compen-
sation shall bear such relation to the compensation therein provided for
total and permanent disability as the partial but permanent disabilities
collectively bear to total and permanent disability. Orlando v. F. Fergu-
son & Son (N. J.)
Computation of Compensation.-There being evidence that ordinary wage for
painters paid in that locality was $4.50 per day, the commission was justi-
fied in making an award based on such wage instead of $2.50, amount
received by the injured painter. Hickox et al. v. Industrial Accident
Commission of state of California et al. (Cal.).
Computation of Compensation. -Motorman employed by interurban electric
railway company and wearing its uniform, who was paid by the hour, and
who operated its cars to the city limits of Chicago and then operated them
within the city limits under an agreement between the interurban com-
pany and a city railway company whereby latter paid wages while operat-
ing within the city, as known to him, was the employee of the Interurban
company and his wages earned while operating cars within the city might
be regarded as part of his annual earnings in employ of interurban
company continuously during the year preceding his death. Chicago &
Interurban Traction Co. v. Industrial Board of Illinois et al. (Ill.).. 518
Computation of Compensation.-When any facts are shown which in judgment
of board warrant it in commuting compensation to lump sum on ground
that such commutation is for best interests of parties, its action is final and
can be reviewed only for errors of law. Schwarm v. George Thompson &
Sons Co. (Ill.)
533
Computation of Compensation.-Proper to use the number 332 for one working
seven days per week, in absence of any showing that it was unfair, but
commission canot arbitrarily fix any particular number for all classes
of persons. In re Prentice-Prentice v. New York State Rys. (N. Y.).. 685
Computation of Compensation.-Employee not entitled to compensation for the
Sunday preceding the Monday on which he went to work. Beers v. Beers
Bros. In re Zurich General Accident & Liability Ins. Co., Limited (N. Y.). 701
Computation of, etc.-Where widow obtains compensation for servant's death,
decree should obtain clause stating in express terms effect of act that
weekly payment is to cease upon death of dependent before expiration of
period of payment. In re Derinza-In re Pucci-In re Contractors' Mut.
Liability Ins. Co. (Mass.)
Computation of, etc.-Where employee worked during summer and, in fall,
after school, as spare-time worker, there was no basis for board to ascer-
tain "average weekly wages"-board's finding of "lost time" cannot be
sustained-amount of compensation is to be determed not by what is
capable of being earned. In re Rice (Mass.)..
816
Computation of Compensation.-Where employee worked during summer and
in fall, after school, as spare-time worker, there was no basis for board to
ascertain "average weekly wages"-board's finding of "lost time" cannot
be sustained-amount of compensation is to be determined not by what is
capable of being earned but what is actually earned. In re Rice (Mass.). 816
Computation of Compensation.-Compensation for loss and use of leg, unaccom-
panied by other physical injury or loss of health, cannot exceed the amount
specified. Hull v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of Baltimore,
Md., et al. (Neb.)
Computation of Compensation.-Employment of cleaning roofs, preliminary to
painting being irregular and only occasional, average annual earnings are
to be fixed not according to method provided by Sec. 17, subdivisions 1 and
2, but according to subdivision 3 as amended. Mahaffey et al. v. In-
dustrial Accident Commission (Cal.)...
Computation of Compensation.-Compensation should be arrived at by dividing
300 times the average daily earnings by 104, unless there is custom to
operate for only part of the working days, in which case such number
of days should be substituted for 300-this applies to miners where
custom is to mine and ship coal 220 days each year-earnings received
by injured employee do not include money paid by miner for powder
and blacksmith work, which must be deducted from actual total amount
received for a year. Richards v. Central Iowa Fuel Co. (Iowa.)..
Computation of Compensation.-Order of board providing that applicant should
be paid half difference between his weekly wage and average wage which
he is able to earn thereafter, which did not state any specific amount
was merely a statement of law and not a finding that there was partial
disability and did not need to be supported by evidence thereof. Jacobs v.
Glasser & Hoffman et al. (Mich.)..
Computation of Compensation.-Order of board providing that applicant should
be paid half the difference between his weekly wage and average wage
which he is able to earn thereafter, which did not state any specific
amount was merely a statement of law and not a finding that there was
partial disability and did not need to be supported by evidence thereof.
Jacobs v. Glasser & Hoffman et al. (Mich.)..
Computation of Compensation.-Where servant who was given different work,
on return after strike and received larger wages, met his death in less
than year thereafter, his earnings for basis of award should be computed
at 300 times his average daily wage, the fact that he previously earned
a less sum not justifying a smaller award. Brown v. Central West
Coal Co. et al. (Mich.).
Computation of Compensation.-The act providing that a party unwilling to
abide by board's findings may appeal and in such case board shall proceed
no further, party not exercising his option to transfer case to court before
board's final decision is bound thereby. General Accident, Fire & Life
Assur. Corp., Limited,.vs. Evans et al. (Tex.)....
Construction.-Compensation Act which transfers to employer his em-
ployee's right of action against third person is constitutional and
valid, the act being binding only when the parties have elected to abide
by it. Friebel v. Chicago City Ry. Co. et al. (Ill.)....
Construction.-"Lawful requirement" does not include a general course
of conduct or those duties and obligations of care and caution which rest
upon employers and employees and all other members of the community,
for the protection of life. health and safety. American Woodenware
Mfg. Co. v. Schorling (Ohio)....
..... 106
Construction.-The Act should be so construed as to carry out the purposes
and object of the act. Mitchell vs. Phillips Mining Co. (Iowa)...
Construction.-Laws 1916, c. 622, amending, brings under act employee in
service of employer carrying on a hazardous employment, even though
such employee is not engaged in a hazardous employment. Dose vs.
Moehle Litographic Co. et al. (N. Y.)..
of contract is essential to operation of Work-
men's Compensation Law, which makes no attempt to make a new
rule for determining what is a contract of employment-statute uses
the word "employees" in its ordinary sense and recognizes the subsis-
tence of a contract of employment which presupposes employer capable
in law of making a contract and makes no definition of "employer" or
"employee" different from the common-law understanding of those words.
Kackel et al.
VS. Serviss In re Employers' Liability Assur. Corp.,
Limited (N. Y.)
Construction.-The act, providing for compensation to alien nonresidents
etc., does not grant compensation, but limits grants otherwise made-
support of applicants for year prior to accident controls-the word
"or" does not restrict compensation to one parent. if both have been
supported, but means "either." State Industrial Commission vs. Mc-
Cormick et al.-In re Casella et al. (N. Y.)....
Construction.-Workmen's Compensation Act must be construed as a whole
and all presumptions indulged will be in favor of those for whose
protection the statutory compensation was fixed and who, by terms of
the act. are deprived of the ordinary remedies open to others whose
rights are invaded. Wick et al. v. Gunn et al. (Okla.)..
Construction.-At time of enactment of Compensation Act the word "in-
jury" had a definite and certain meaning which could not be changed
by the court on the theory that the Legislature with specific definition
intended to change that meaning under the act. Cooke V. Holland
Furnace Co. et al. (Mich.)...
Construction.-Employers' Liability Law is a valid enactment within
the police power of the state. Superior & Pittsburg Copper Co. v.
Davidovich (Ariz.)
727
Construction.-Workmen's Compensation Act making counties subject
thereto is not unconstitutional as depriving counties of due process of
law-county cannot defeat Commission's action for moneys to compen-
sate injured employee of county on theory that there is no money in
county treasury available in absence of answer pleading such fact.
Nevada Industrial Commission v. Washoe County (Nev.)
Contract. Whether there is a contract of employment, within the Act, is a
question of law, depending upon established facts and the parties may
not make a contract which the law says is not a contract. Kackel et al.
vs. Serviss In re Employers' Liability Assur. Corp., Limited (N. Y.).... 235
Contributing Cause.
(SEE PROXIMATE CAUSE.)
Contributory Negligence.-Evidence of, erroneous when employer elects not
to be bound by act. Daly vs. New Staunton Coal Co. (Ill.)....
Contributory Negligence.-If any defect existed it was employee's fault and
not imputable to ditch company, therefore, latter was not liable. Brown
V. Lemon Cove Ditch Co. (Cal.)..
Costs, Interest and Attorney's Fees.
Costs, Interest and Attorney's Fees.-Judgment on award of Industrial Board
properly allowed interest and each past-due installment from the time
it became due and payable. McMurray vs. Peabody Coal Co. (Ill.).... 824
Costs, Interest and Attorney's Fees.-Compensation should be allowed up to
date of trial alone without prejudice to sue for unmatured installments,
and judgment should not be given for total amount. Southern Surety
Co. vs. Stubbs et al. (Tex.)
Costs. Interests and Attorney's Fees.-Employer has a meritorious defense to
allowance of attorney's fees, where claimant had refused to accept
weekly payments or any other payments except lump sum award-
statute gives no authority to allow an attorney's fee to be taxed against
the party paying compensation unless the party refuses to pay the com-
pensation or some installment thereof. McMurray vs. Peabody Coal Co.
(III.)
Costs, Interests and Attorneys' Fees.-Award should bear 5 per cent interest
on amount due from date of award and on subsequent installments after
they respectively become due. Chicago & Interurban Traction Co. v.
Industrial Board of Illinois et al. (II.).
518
Costs, etc.,--Only extraordinary circumstances will justify allowance of
attorney's lien for any considerable part of amount awarded. State ex
rel. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. v. District Court of Hennepin
County et al.-Rush v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. (Minn.).... 835
Course of Employment.-Evidence shows that decedent at the time of
injury was performing part of his duties at time and place required by
such duties and, therefore, accident occurred in course of employment.
Haskell & Barker Car Co. v. Brown et al. (Ind.)..
Course of Employment.-Fall of employee was due to slippery unguarded
and dangerous condition of trestle and ladder which he had to use in his
work, injury was caused by risk incident to work he was employed to do.
In re Uzzio (Mass.)
Course of Employment.-Injury received on last trip of day and after ex-
piration of hours of employment is, nevertheless, within the act. Friebel
v. Chicago City Ry. Co. et al. (III.). .
Course of Employment.-Injury to janitor. who was frozen in severely cold
weather while shoveling snow from the sidewalks was an accidental
injury arising out of employment. State ex rel. Nelon v. District Court,
Ramsey County, et al. (Minn.)...
Course of Employment.-Where employee is exposed to happening of an
event causing accident by working conditions of plant, there is no longer
a risk to which all are exposed and the result is an accident arising out
of employment. State ex rel. Rau v. District Court, Ramsey County,
et al. (Minn.)
Course of Employment.-Before board can allow compensation it must be
shown that assured received injury in the course of employment.
Bucyrus Co. vs. Townsend et al. (Ind.)..
Course of Employment.-Bricklayer, employed by lithographing company to
paint up wall of its plant and repair cracks, was engaged in employ-
ment requisite to business carried on by company, and injury received
was within course of employment. Dose vs. Moehle Lithographic Co.
et al. (N. Y.)...
Course of Employment.-Claimant directed by engineer
to survey floors
underneath decking in subway and while so engaged he became very
dirty. After leaving subway it was his duty to retire to engineer's field
office to do certain work, where kind of a shower bath was provided
for men similarly engaged. The claimant and assistant engineer had
improvised shower bath. Held, injuries to claimant occurring while
taking bath arose out of and in the course of employment. Sexton vs.
Public Service Commission of City of New York (N. Y.).....
Course of Employment.-Employee leaving employer's premises and injured
by fall resulting from misstep while reaching for stairway rail, received
an injury arising out of employment. In re O'Brien-In re Employers'
Liability Assur. Corp., Ltd. (Mass.).
Course of Employment.-Employer was contractor and had contract for con-
struction work on main and second floors of garage, but had no posses-
sion of basement and made no use of it. During noon hour, deceased
and other workmen went to boiler room in basement to eat their dinner,
and, after being away from premises, decedent returned to boiler room
to await time for going to work and was killed by boller exploding-
accident was not one arising out of and in the course of employment.
Manor vs. Pennington-In re Etna Life Ins. Co. (N. Y.)..
Course of Employment.-Evidence sufficient to sustain finding of trial court
that death of employee resulted from injuries which he had sustained and
not solely from disease. State ex rel. Jefferson et al. District Court of
Ramsey County et al. (Minn.).....
Course of Employment.-Injury arises out of employment where there exists
a causal connection between conditions under which work is required and
resulting injury-shool teacher received injury "arising out of employ-
ment" where injured in shoving over a heavy desk not in its accustomed
place. Elk Grove Union High School Dist. vs. Industrial Acc. Com-
mission of State California-In re Hoag (Cal.)..
Course of Employment.-Injury to employee working in different buildings,
who slipped on ice in street, which highway was part of place provided
him to work in, arises out of and in course of employment. Redner vs.
H. C. Faber & Son.-In re Frankfort General Ins. Co. (N. Y.).....
Course of Employment.-Messenger boy who, when he departs from scope
of employment, climbs upon passing vehicle, not owned or controlled
by his employer, cannot be said to have been injured in the course of
his employment. State ex rel. Miller VS. District Court, Hennepin
County, et al. (Minn.)
Course of Employment.-Whether injury occurred in course of employment
or result of wilful misconduct involves jurisdictional facts. Elk Grove
Union High School Dist. VS. Industrial Acc. Commission of State of
California-In re Hoag (Cal.).
143
Course of Employment.-Driver sat near boiler while waiting for op-
portunity to use elevator and caught fire, held accident arose out of
employment as the act precludes defense of negligence. Richards vs.
Indianapolis Abattoir Co. et al (Conn.)..
Course of Employment.-Evidence sufficient to sustain finding that deceased
workman died from blood poisoning as result of injury arising out of
and in course of employment. State ex rel. Albert Dickinson Co. et al.
vs. District Court, Hennepin County et al.-Rackman vs. Albert Dickin-
son (Minn.)
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.com.pe/books/content?id=Kg4WAAAAYAAJ&output=html_text&pg=PT19&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&q=editions:UOM39015065180872&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U3jni89tpUAO2dVsHGtAVHnylljgQ&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=164,1263,7,6)
Course of Employment.-Assistant engineer on dredge required to spend his
hours off duty on board, who was accidentally drowned in a storm
while off duty and while engaged in attempting to save the dredge from
shipwreck, was killed in the course of his employment. Southern Surety
Co. vs. Stubbs et al. (Tex.)
Course of Employment.-Bridge builder having finished work for day, when
struck by lightning, while sitting in boarding tent furnished by em-
ployer. did not receive injury arising out of his employment, Griffith
vs. Cole Bros. et al. (Iowa)...
Course of Employment.-One is in course of his employment though he has
not yet actually entered upon task if he is at required place with
purpose of performing services required of him-bridge builder having
finished his work for day, while sitting in lodging tent provided by
employer at scene of bridge building, when killed by a stroke of lightning,
was in course of his employment. Griffith vs. Cole Bros. et al. (Iowa) 368
Course of Employment.-When night switchman had completed hours of his
active service for the night, and was proceeding to the entrance of plant
to register out, which was a further duty of his employment, his injury
was suffered in Course of employment. Inland Steel Co. vs. Lambert
(Ind.)
Course of Employment.-Evidence insufficient to show that deceased's in-
juries arose out of and in course of employment, which was running a
coring saw. C. E. Peterson & Co. vs. Industrial Board of Illinois et al.
(Ill.)
Course of Employment.-Employer not required to pay compensation unless
accident arise out of employment. Boggess et al. vs. Industrial Accident
Commission et al. (Cal.)
Course of Employment.-Night watchman's resort to circular saw for making
board for barricade was beyond scope of employment. Brusster et al.
vs. Industrial Accident Commission et al. (Cal.).
Course of Employment.-Deceased at suggestion of yardmaster jumped
fence intending to board slow moving train to secure overalls and tools
and was killed by a suburban train, held acting within scope of em-
ployment and so falling within the act. Alexander vs. Industrial Board
et al. (Ill.)
Course of Employment.-Compensation can only be made for personal injuries
or death by accident arising out of and in course of employment and
unless a disease is traceable to an accident as defined in statute. the
law does not award compensation. Blair vs. Omaha Ice & Cold Storage
Co. (Neb.)
.... 424
Course of Employment.-The act presuming that injury was not caused to
employee intentionally or from intoxication is inapplicable on question
whether injury arose within employment-night watchman who went
asleep and fell through an open door not injured within line of em-
ployment. Gifford vs. T. G. Patterson. Inc. et al. (N. Y.)..
Course of employment.-If there is any evidence to support finding, court
will not weigh it or disturb finding-evidence sufficient to support find-
ing that loss of claimant's eye was due to foreign substance entering
eye while he was working in plant of employer. Riley vs. Mason Motor
Co. et al. (Mich.).
Course of Employment.-Fireman after returning from dinner, put on his
working clothes and went to engine and roundhouse and later was
found dead, evidence warranted award. Meyers vs. Michigan Cent. R.
Co. (Mich.)
Course of Employment.-Fence builder for railroad requested by foreman to
go to work and walk down track direct for work killed on way. relation
of master and servant existed within the act. Porritt VS. Detroit
United Ry. (Mich.)
Course of Employment.-To entitle widow to workmen's compensation it
must appear that he was not only killed in course of employment,
but that his injuries arose out of his employment. Griffith vs. Cole
Bros. et al. (Iowa)
Course of Employment.-Railroad car inspector while taking a short cut
to report to a railroad with which his employer exchanged services of
employees under certain conditions was hurt by an accident arising out
of employment. In re Maroney (Ind.).....
Course of Employment.-While injuries from lightning may in some cases be
due to employment, in order to warrant an award the nature of employ-
ment must have increased the hazard from lightning-since the act defin-
ing industrial employment, contemplates compensation for industrial
accidents only, it does not necessarily follow, from the fact that one
struck by lightning might recover on an accident policy, or otherwise
recover for such injury. that therefore recovery may be had under the
act-the mere fact that the tent was in low ground and that tent was
wet and that there were wires in it, and that near it was a pile of struc-
tural steel; and that master had failed to equip tent with lightning
rods did not establish causative connection between negligence and injury
so as to allow compensation. Griffith vs. Cole Bros. et al. (Iowa)....
Course of Employment.-Where fire agent slipped on icy sidewalk while
proceeding from train to hotel in town to which his employer had sent
him, injury arose out of his employment. In re Harraden (Ind.).....
Course of Employment.-Employee reached point where he intended taking
stage to employer's mine. when superintendent asked him to assist
loading goods into auto trucks. telling him employer would pay for his
time and as a matter of convenience offering him to ride on truck in-
stead of stage. Accident occurring did not arise in course of employ-
ment. Boggess et al vs. Industrial Accident Commission et al (Cal.).. 293
Course of Employment.-Where there was evidence tending to support
superior court's finding that injury was sustained while employee en-
gaged in sport of throwing a bobbin and bobbin pounder back and forth,
it was not subject to review by Supreme Court. Leclaire vs. Glen-
garry Mills, Inc. (R. I.)
Course of Employment.-Act of deceased in getting on wagon after it was
unloaded, and riding back for another load was a natural act in the
course of his employment. Horn vs. Arnett (N. J.)....
Course of Employment.-Where night switchman, after quitting work for
night, proceeding to plant entrance to register out, attempted to board
a switch engine going in that direction, for purpose of avoiding ex-
|