City

672

Injury incurred while scuffling with subforeman held not compensable.
of Pasadena v. Indust. Acc. Comm. (Cal.)...
Accidental shooting by employer held injury within act. Gen. Acc., Fire &
Life Assur. Corp. v. Indust. Acc. Comm. (Cal)..
Where truck driver fell from truck when suffering attack of heart disease
and was crushed to death, compensation was recoverable-injury aria-
ing solely from idiopathic condition is not compensable employee's
state of health is incident of employment within act. Geo. L. Eastman
Co. v. Indust. Acc. Comm. (Cal.).

Injury which is received in course of employment does not necessarily arise
out of employment. Spring Canyon Coal Co. v. Indust. Comm of Utah
(Utah.)

74. INJURY AS PROXIMATE CAUSE.
Death from disease ensuing after injury which, but for accident, would not
have ensued, and which disease causes death, held compensable. Gei-
zel v. Regina Co. (N. J.)....

Injury to workman need not be sole cause of his death in order to entitle
his dependents to compensation, but it is sufficient if it be a concurring
Miami Coal Co. v. Luce (Ind.)

cause.

Death from disease develoipg after injury held compensable.

(Wash.).....

-

SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT.

(1). In general.

668

659

891

582

498

Anderson v.

762

Death of employee assisiting in filling oil tank, without having been expressly
ordered to so do, held to have arisen "out of and in course of his em-
ployment". Milne v. Sanders (Tenn.)

If employee is injured by risk incidental to his employment but while he is
doing something utterly irrelevant to employment, he is not entitled to
compensation. Reeves v. John A. Dady Corp. (Conn.).

Injury received while using forbidden means held not to "arise in course of
employment". Fournier's Case (Me.)

16

75

Injury while voluntarily driving team in parade not held during working
hours and without pay was properly held not compensable. Hutno v.
Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co. (Pa.)

Finding that chauffeur's fall from truck was caused by sudden jerk of truck,
McClos-
held final on appeal, and ground for award of death benefits.
key v. Richard Hellman, Inc. (N. Y.)
Injuries to oiler received away from machinery he oiled and in place where
he had no business to be held not to "arise out of and in course of em-
ployment". Haas v Kansas City Light & Power Co. (Kan.).
Fatal injuries to chauffeur, while taking friends on pleasure trip before he
was to call at designated place for employer, did not arise out of em-
ployment though employer consented to such trips. Lansing v. Hayes
(N. Y.)
Death of employee while crossing railroad at unusual place, although in
course of employment was not compensable. Mason v. Alexandre (Conn.) 354
Where fireman in sawmill was injured by contact with saw, not in vicinity
of his duties, injury was not. compensable. Pierre v. Barringer (La.)... 395
Injury to salesman injured while doing service for customer held compensa-
ble. Chase v. Emery Mfg. Co. (Pa.)..
injury to minor doing forbidden act held not compensable.-Fact that em-
ployer paid injured employee money during time of temporary disabilty
did not preclude employer from making defense that employee at time
of accident was not performing serviee growing out of and incidental to
his employment. Radtke Bros. v. Indust. Comm. of Wis. (Wis.)..
Injury in elevator at noon held in course of employment, for employer was
Martin v. Metro-
bound to furnish safe exit from place of employment.
politan Life Ins. Co. (N. Y.)

Injury by kick of horse, beaten by employee in anger, held not compensable.
Harris v Kaul (Minn.)

416

460

601

564

Injury while extinguishing fire held within art-act necessary for benefit of
employer is in course of employment. Associated Employers' Recipro-

(Okla.)

cal v. State Indust. Comm.
Traveling salesman, killed while attempting to escape from burning hotel,
held within act. Stransberry v. Monitor Stove Co. (Minn.).
Injury to miner riding in "cage" in violation of law held within act.
Colliery Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Ill.)

742

713

Union

698

(2). Injury received while going to or from work.
Injury received while going to or from work is not in course of employment.
(Cal.)......
Clapp's Parking Station v. Indust, Acc. Comm.
Sawmill employee riding homeward from work on own velocipede on
pany's tramroad and killed by train held not in course of employment.
Kirby Lumber Co. v. Scurlock (Tex.)

9

com-

153

Under circumstances stated, injury while seeking transportation from work
held not compensable. Orsinie v. Torrance (Conn.).
Injury received on street while going to restaurant held not one "arising out
of or in course of employment". Clark v. Voorhees (N. Y.)

353

412

Injury while going home to lunch during the noon hor held not compensa-
ble. Taylor v. Binswanger & Co. (Va.)
When workman was killed some distance from place of his employment,
while boarding train on which employer furnished free transportation
from place of employment to workman's home, held accident causing
death was one which "arose out of and in course of employment".
Fisher v. Tidewater Building Co. (N. J.
Where shipbuilding company operated under contract with federal govern-
ment on cost plus profits basis and company's expenses in furnishing
railroad transportation to employees were part of cost, injury to em-
ployee boarding train to return home held in "course of employment".
Western Indemnity Co. v. Leonard (Tex.)

450

581

632

848

To render employer liable for malpractice of physician, injury must result
from necessary efforts to relieve from consequences of original injury
received during employment. Wood v. Vroman (Mich.)...
Injury on street while obtaining supplies for lunch on employer's premises
held not to arise out of employment. Pearce v. Indust. Comm. (I.).. 786
Injury to salesman on way to visit first customer held compensable; "per-
forming services growing out of and incidental to his empoyment".
U S. Casualty Co. v. Superior Hardware Co. (Wis.)...

Death may be found as having been caused by accident although there was
diseased bodily condition prior to injury without which death would not
have ensued. Geizel . Regina Co. (N J.)

Occurrence which merely hastens existing disease to fina! culmination will
be deemed "accident" and, where such occurrence arises out of and in
course of employment, compensation will be awarded. Utilities Coal Co.
v. Herr (Ind.)

$ 377.

DEFENSES TO CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION.

899

582

806

In action against railroad for injuries to consignee's employee struck by bar-
rel, rolling from freight car to storehouse platform, whether railroad
employees were negligent in releasing barrel and permitting it to run
wild held question for jury.-Contributory negligence of consignee's em-
ployee struck by barrel held for jury. Davis v. Central Vt. Ry. Co. (Vt.) 328

€ 378. - IN GENERAL.

Fact that injured employee received more wages since injury than he was
earning at time of injury does not preclude compensation if he has been
unable, by reason of injury. to follow particular employment he was en-
gaged in when injured, Woodcock v. Dodge Bros. (Mich.)..
Claim should not be disallowed as against insurance carrier because em-
ployer and servant had agreed to filing of complaint by employee in
order to fix liability on carrier, such agreement not being improper, and
it was not material that employer paid employee "more than is allowed
by law, being pure gratuity. Chase v. Emery Mfg. Co. (Pa.)
Act allows compensation regardless of employee's fault. Anderson v. Indust.
Ins. Comm. (Wash.)
Evidence tending to show that automobile driver who injured pedestrian was
at time to left of and beyond center of street in turning to right held to
make a driver's negligence question for jury. U. S. Casualty Co. v. Su-
perior Hardware Co. (Wis.)·

$ 379.

#380.

MISREPRESENTATIONS BY EMPLOYEE IN OBTAINING EM-
PLOYMENT.

97

416

762

899

WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OF EMPLOYEE IN GENERAL.
Injuries to youthful worker using elevator contrary to orders held not "pur-
posely self-inflicted". Twin Peaks Canning Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Utah.) 176
Insult provoking assault held not willful misconduct defeating compensa-
tion. Knocks v. Metal Package Corp. (N. Y.)

Employer cannot repudiate agreed settlement with claimant, in reliance on
which claimant had dismissed petition for compensation and had taken
out letters of administration on husband's estate, on ground that settle-
ment was entered into by employer without full knowledg of facts.
Kuhn v. Pa. R. Co. (Pa.)

Consideration for claimant's covenant not to, sue third person held not al-
lowable in reduction of claim.-Claimant's Covenant not to sue third
person held not release of liability for "damages". Renner v. Model
Laundry, Cleaning & Dyeing Co. (Iowa.)

589

274

818

(B) COMPENSATION.

FUNDS, AND CONTRIBUTIONS

$ 383. ACCIDENT OR INSURANCE

THERETO.

Regulations under Porto Rican Compensation Law presumed to give em-
ployer notice of premium assessments. Camunas V. Porto Rico Ry.,
Light & Power Co. (U, S.)

§ 384.

..........

AMOUNT AND COMPUTATION OF AWARD.

385. DISABILITY BENEFITS.

(1). In general.

Where coal miner was prevented from earning average amount earned by
miners because of conditions existing in room where he worked and not
through lack of industry or inability, compensation will be based on
average amount earned by miners doing similar work and not on actual
amount earned by injured. Centralia Coal Co. v. Indust. Comm. (III.)..
Where employee had earned as much or more since injury as he was earn-
ing at time of injury, and it did not appear that he was unable to work
in employment in which he was engaged at time of injury, award of one-
half difference between weekly earnings at time of accident and wage
he was able to earn thereafter in same employment must be set aside.
Woodcock v. Dodge Bros. (Mich.)

467

22

97

115

554

Failure to find work is no ground for compensation, if failure has origin in
general business conditions and slackness of demand for labor. Jordan
v. Decorative Co. (N. Y.)
Declarations of claimant that she could not work under conditions which
involved mere personal friction between her and her superior, unsupport-
ed by other evidence, were insufficient to show that she was not able to
perform services required of her. Schapiro v. Wanamaker (N. Y.)..... 623
Compensation not defeated by ability to perform similar skilled work for
same wages. Geis v. Packard Motor Car Co. (Mich)..
Evidence that claimant had been employed as foreman and inspector, which
was skilled work, and that he was still unable to perform duties of that
employment because of injuries received, though he had been employed
by the employer since injury, held to sustain finding that he was still dis-
abled. Myers v. Wadsworth Mfg. Co. (Mich.)
Compensation for both temporary and permanent disability is left to judg-
ment of commission.-Hysterical condition is element of compensation.
Moray v. Indust. Comm. (Utah)

Wages paid after injury are not conclusive of question of compensable dis-
ability. London Guar, & Acc. Co. v. Indust. Acc. Comm, (Colo.).
"Disability" means impairment or lessening of earning capacity, and not loss
of member or permanent loss of use thereof. Moses v. Nat'l Union Coal
Mining Co. (Iowa.)

Method of computing compensation for partial disability defined.
Indemnity Co. v. Milam (Tex.)

Western

301

Injured employee, who was totally disabled from performing services of his
skilled occupation by injury, is entitled to compensation for total dis-
ability, though his employer had put him on the pay roll in former ca-
pacity and paid him the same wages for light work as messenger. Geis
v. Packard Motor Car Co. (Mich.)

Compensation for loss of foot and total disability held properly awarded.
Pullman Car Lines v. Riley (Del.)

(8). Partial disability.

Injured was not entitled to recover for partial incapacity after date on which
he became able to earn in suitable employment amount equal to that
earned before injury.-Employee is "physically able to work" when he
can do so without seriously endangering his life or health. Voight v.
Indust Comm. (III.)

(Mich.)

554

684

$7

Compensation for partial disability runs from date of injury. Nieminen v.
Isle Royal Copper Co.
409
Claimant is under no incapacity when able to pursue former occupation.-If
employee's injury prevented his pursuing former employment and ability
to labor in other pursuits was impaired by injury, this circumstance was
important in determining amount of wages he could earn and should be
taken into account in determining what compensation should be awarded
him because of diminished capacity to work. In awarding compensation
for partial incapacity to work, reduction in earning capacity occasioned
by general business conditions, and not due to injury, cannot be con-
sidered. If injured employee could not return to former employment
because of business conditions, and sought for or secured employment

elsewhere which he could perform if it were not for his inability because
of his injury, his earning power and labor efficiency were lessened. Ca-
pone's Case (Mass.)

(9).— Loss of or injury to eye.

Award for partial permanent loss of vision held adequate. Moray v. Indust.
Comm. (Utah)

542

747

Compensation allowable for loss of use of member in permanently impaired
"class". Clark v. Kennebec Journal Co. (Me.)..
Master cannot escape liability for compensation for permanent partial disa-
bility because employee, before expiration of, period covered by pay-
ments, returned to work and received the same compensation as before.
Mercury Aviation Co. v. Indust, Acc. Comm. (Cal.)

(11%). Loss of or injury to eye.

Б6

483

400

491

747

Under circumstances, workman's eye held lost and he was propenly allowed
compensation during development of injury, not applicable to award for
loss. Stammers v. Banner Coal Co. (Mich.)
Maximum compensation held allowable for "disability" from injury to eye.
Employers' Mut. Ins. Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Colo.)
Injury to eye from electric flash held not permanent total disability nor loss
not otherwise povided for. Moray v. Indust. Comm.' (Utah).
Where employee sustains personal injury by accident arising out of and
in course of employment which irrecoverably destroys sight of right
eye, though with extra artificial means she may have fair vision, she
is entitled to compensation as for loss of eye. Butch v. Shaver (Minn.) 857
Compensation as for total permanent disability properly awarded for loss
of sole eye. Combination Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Court of Common Pleas
in and for Essex County (N. J.)

(11). Loss of or injury to ear.

(12).— Loss of arm, hand, or finger.
Compensation for loss of thumb and parts of fingers limited to 25 weeks ex-
cept where hand is rendered permanently incapable of use. Jakutis'
Case (Mass.)
Fact that there has been no loss of wages from permanent impairment of
use of hand does not afford answer to application, loss of earning power
in near future being sufficient. Clark v. Kennebec Journal Co. (Me.)..
Commission properly based award for loss of fingers on proportion of loss
of use of hand. North Beck Mining Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Utah)..
Injury to arm, hand, or finger.
Injury to leg or foot

(13).
(14).

"Loss of use" of foot should be considered as of "loss" of the foot, and
compensation awarded as of disability partial in character but perma-
nent in quality. Moses v. Nat'l Union Coal Mining Co. (Iowa.).
(15). Temporary disability.

872

80

56

755

810

For reasons stated in opinion, action of Commission complained of is re-
versed, and cause remanded, with directions to modify award as prayed
for. Smith v. Oklahoma State Industrial Commission (Okla.)..
Commission allowing less than maximum compensation for temporary dis-
ability must fix time. Moray v. Indust. Comm. (Utah)....

(16). Expenses of medical or surgical treatment, and nursing.
(17). Deductions or set-offs, and duty of claimant to reduce loss.
('ompensation may be allowed without deductions for voluntary payment of
wages. Mercury Aviation Co. v. Indust. Acc. Comm. (Cal)..
Allowance of credit to employer for sums voluntarily paid injured employee
to maintain family if they had not been expended in purchase of house
Indust. Acc. Comm. (Cal.)

Where it was stipulated by parties before Commission that employee was
injured and had been paid certain sum for compensation, it was error
to confirm award which made no allowance for compensation paid.
Union Colliery Co. v. Indust. Comm. (II.).

630

747

483

483

790

Industrial Board is without jurisdiction to order injured employee to sub-
mit to major operation involving risk of life, however slight, in order
that pecuniary obligations created by law in his favor against his em-
ployer may be minimized.-Commission is not authorized to require
claimant to undergo operation or forfeit right to compensation. Henley
v. Oklahoma Union Ry. Co. (Okla.)
125
Injured has right to choose own physician. Snyder v. Indust. Comm. (Ill.). 32
Unreasonable refusal of injured employee to permit surgical operation justi-
fies court in refusing compensation. Strong v. Sonken-Galamba Iron &
Metal Co. (Kan.)
Tpreasonable refusal to submit to operation justifies cessation of compen-
sation. Myers v. Wadsworth Mfg. Co. (Mich.)

224

543

Claimant's duty to submit to "reasonably essential" operation implies neces-
sity of considering not merely opinions of medical men, though all of
them agree, but all the facts before attempting to decide. Grant V.
State Indust. Accident Comm. (Ore.).
880

(19). Excessive award.

(20). Commutation of payments and award of gross sum.
Injured employee being of age, his weekly payments cannot be redeemed by
payment of lump sum, except after they have been continued for not
less than 6 months, and except by agreement of parties and determi-
nation of accident board that it is for best interest of employee. Ja-
kutis' Case (Mass.)

Commutation of compensation to lump sum without board's approval void.
Employers' Indemnity Corp. v. Woods (Tex.)..

Discount is reqired when compensation is increased and number of weeks
decreased. Western Indemnity Co. v. Milam (Tex.).
Compensation in lump sum authorized only in case of death or total perma-
nent incapacity. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Pierce (Tex.).....

80

290

301

311

370

Three hundred day rule of compating compensation approved, "if not other-
wise determinable". Zenni v. South Des Moines Coal Co. (Iowa.)..... 47
Compensation to partial dependents is measured by actual "average amount
contributed weekly" instead of technical "average weekly wage". Indian
Creek Coal & Mfg. Co. v. Kutter (Ind.)
Compensation for death arises out of contractual relation and is in lieu of
damages. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Boudreaux (Tex.)
435
In absence of agreement to contraary, percentage of wages recoverable by
dependent is to be paid in installments as wages would have been paid
to deceased employee. Heinzelman v. Board of Com'rs of Port of New
Orleans (La.)
"Annual amount" contributed as basis of compensation to dependents held
to be contribution at time of injury. Spreckels Sugar Co. v. Indust, Acc.
Comm. (Cal.)

Entire compensation not allowable to father as dependent; burial expenses
held allowable on appeal from compensation judgment. Heinzelman v,
Board of Com'rs of Port of New Orleans (La.)
Expenses of support of minor to be deducted from contributions

531

488

531

.

depend-

ent parent claiming compensation. Federal Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. v. In-
dust. Acc. Comm. (Cal.)

666

(2). Deductions.

Claimant's agreement for deduction of funeral expenses binding. Kostamo
v. H. G. Christman Co.

(Mich.)

......

(4). Commutation of payments and award of gross sum.
(E). Apportionment of payments.

Statutes of descent and distribution must be looked to for rule by which to
apportion compensation among dependents.-Compensation for death of
husband and father partakes more nearly of community than of sepa-
rate property and should be distributed according to statute of descent
and distribution applicable in distributing community property. Texas
Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Boudreaux (Tex.).

Award on contested claim held properly made to administrator.
Coal Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Ill.)

§ 387.

F

388.

DOUBLE COMPENSATION.

544

435

Peabody

784-

28

Employee receiving two injuries, one that disables him and another that
causes disfigurement, is entitled to compensation for disability and dis-
figurement.-Employee disabled and disfigured by same injury is not enti-
tled to recover for disfigurement.-Woman paid compensation for injury,
is not entitled to
further compensation for disfigurement resulting
therefrom. Chicago Home for the Friendless v Indust. Comm. (I.)...
Award for loss of use of member, being "for disability partial in character
and permanent in quality precludes compensation "for injury producing
temporary disability". Moses v. Nat'l Union Coal Mining Co. (Iowa.)... 810
PERSONS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION FOR DEATH OF EM-
PLOYEE (DEPENDENTS).
Administrator not entitled to compensation on injured employee's death
from other causes prev' us to award. Heiselt Const. Co. v. Indust.
Comm. (Utah.)
When there is no one
nolly dependent on deceased employee, compensa-
tion shall be paid those partially dependent in such "proportionate sum"
as may be determined according to measure of dependency. Quilty v.
Connecticut Co. (Conn.)
Compensation recoverable for period between employee's death and bene-
ficiary's death. East St. Louis Board of Ed. v. Indust, Comm. (Ill.).
"And" in provision for compensation to alien dependents may not be con-
strued as "o"
Vietti v. George K. Mackie Fuel Co. (Kan.)..

166

13

200

235