Evidence held suficient to sustain finding that death' resulted from accidental
gas poisoning. Larrabee's Case (Me.)
Finding that death by tuberculosis resulted from fractured ankle held sus-
tanied by legal evidence, consisting of testimony of physician who
treated decedent, Gray v. St. Croix Paper Co. (Me.)
Finding that death was result of injury held warranted by evidence. Krue-
ger v. Hayes Mfg. Co. (Mich.)
Evidence held sufficient to support inference by commission that injured
died from electric shock and not from another cause. Paton v. Port
Huron Engine & Thresher Co. (Mich.)...
Finding of compensable injury from strain in performance of duties, held
sustained by evidence. Zukowsky v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron
Co. (Pa.)
Finding of wife's dependency held sustained by evidence. Hinchuk v. Swift
& Co. (Minn)
Evidence held to sustain finding that death resulted from hemorrhage caused
by blow from dump wagon used in course of employment. Yodis v.
Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co. (Pa.)
Evidence held to sustain finding that fire was accidental. Milne v. Sanders
(Tenn.)
Sunstroke held not shown to be injury arising out of employment which was
delivering coal. Dougherty's Case (Mass.)
Where evidence does not show that claimant's hernia did not exist before
accident, or that it was not caused by work for other employers after
accident, award cannot be sustained on mere guess of commission's ex-
pert as to cause of claimant's condition a year and a half after accident.
McCarthy v. Globe Automatic Sprinkler Co. (N. Y.)..
Evidence held not to warrant finding that paralysis resulted from contact
with swinging door. Fink v. Sheldon Axle & Spring Co. (Pa.).
Evidence held not to show that cerebral hemorrhage was caused by threat
of fellow employee. Ideal Fuel Co. v. Indust. Comm. (III.)
Evidence held insufficient to show conditions resulted from lead poisoning.
St. Louis Smelting & Ref'g Co. v. Indust. Comm. (III.)..
Evidence held insufficient to show that wagon driver's death was caused by
fall. Lawrence Ice Cream Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Ill.).
Evidence held to show that death from tetanus resulted from injury in em-
ployment. Bresee v. Clark Equipment Co. (Mich.)......
Evidence that employee was directed to go on gondola car and was seen on
it and few minutes later was found in half-reclining position at foot of
ladder leading to top of car, and complained of being hurt, and died
soon after from acute dilation of heart which in opinion of physicians
could be and usually was produced by a fall, warranted conclusion that
employee either jumped or fell from car and death was caused by shock.
Shaw v. Packard Motor Car Co. (Mich.)
Evidence held insufficient to show cancer was result "naturally and unavoid-
ably" resulting from accidental injury. Schapiro v. Wanamaker (N. Y.) 623
Evidence held to sustain finding that cause of death was injuries sustained
in explosion in coal mine, while deceased was engaged in firing shots
therein, and not a mechanical obstruction of the bowels, as claimed by
employer. Miami Coal Co. v.. Luce (Ind.)
Claimant's evidence of cause of death following operation held insufficient.
Dulac v, Procter & Bowie Co. (Me.)
Evidence held to warrant finding that injury, followed by fatal attack of
pneumonia, was proximate cause of death. Anderson v. Indust. Ins.
Comm. (Wash.)
Evidence held sufficient to warrant finding that motor truck driver was run
over and killed by truck. Geo. L. Eastman Co. v. Indust, Acc. Comm.
(Cal.)
Direct evidence that occurrence hastened death was not necessary in order
to establish that fact if other facts would warrant such an inference.
Utilities Coal Co x. Herr (Ind.)....
Testimony supports finding that injury complained of arose out of and in
course of respondent's employment. Butch v. Shaver (Minn.)..
Evidence examined, and held that there is no evidence to support award.
Associated Employers' Reciprocal v. State Indust. Comm. (Okla.)
Fact that employee was killed by insane fellow employee, without more ap-
pearing, held not to justify inference to support award for death, that
fellow employee's act was directed against deceased "because of his em-
ployment". Spring Canyon Coal Co. v. Indust. Comm. of Utah (Utah... 891
Claimant's relationship to deceased held not shown. Brown v. Long Mfg.
Co. (Mich.)
Evidence held to sustain finding of dependency. Driscoll v. Jewell Belting
Co. (Conn.)
Evidence held to support finding of trial judge that decedent's father was
dependent upon him. Halbeisen v. H. Koppers Co. (N. J.)
Evidence held to support findings of Commission that father was not shown
to be incapable of or actually disabled from earning his own living.
Picardi v. Indust. Comm. (Colo.)
Evidence held to show claimant's partial dependency on unmarried son al-
though decedent had not contributed anything for a period of seven
weeks prior to his death after having left home.-Evidence upon which
Board may act as establishing partial or entire dependency of claimant,
need not be direct but may be circumstantial. Kostamo v. H. G. Christ-
man Co. (Mich.)
Highest degree of evidence of dependency is not required, and it is suffi-
cient if there is some evidence of a probative character to support find-
ings of Commission. Bennett v. Page Bros. (N. Y.)
Where no claim had been made for compensation for employee's death, al-
though over three years had elapsed and no relatives were present at his
funeral and no inquiries had been made concerning him, held that Com-
mission were warranted in finding there were no dependents. Inter-
Urban Const. Co. v. Indust. Comm (Utah)
Evidence held not to show claimant's dependency on daughter.
E. I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co. (N. J.)...
Evidence held not to warrant finding that claimant could not obtain em-
ployment during certain period by reason of his injuries, having left
work paying same wages as he had received prior to injury without ex-
planation. Jordan v. Decorative Co. (N. Y.)
Evidence held to sustain finding that applicant was totally disabled, al-
though he was able to earn good wages but not equal to those he earned
previous to injury. Margenovitch v. Newport Mining Co. (Mich.).
Finding that injured employee was not totally incapacitated held supported
by testimony. Strong v. Sonken-Galamba Iron & Metal Co. (Kan.).
Evidence held insufficient to show permanent loss of use of leg. St. Louis
Smelting & Ref'g Co. v. Indust Comm. (Ill.)...
Award held unsupported by evidence, claimant appearing to be "malingerer".
Dunn v. Brooklyn Rapid Transit Co. (N. Y.)
Uncontradicted medical testimony that operation of minor nature on work-
man's arm offered good chance of restoring use of hand, which other-
wise would be permanently disabled, and that operation was attended
with little or no risk, and could not injure arm, held not to sustain com-
mission's finding that workman's refusal to undergo operation at em-
ploye's expense was reasonable. Myers v. Wadsworth Mfg. Co. (Mich.). 549
Compensation not allowable without showing inability to secure work in
former employment or impairment of ability. Capone's Case (Mass.)... 542
Evidence held to justify increase of compensation award. Western Foundry
Co. v. Indust. Comm. (Ill.)
701
London Guar. &
678
Evidence held to justify finding of compensable disability.
Evidence held insufficient to sustain allowance of weekly sum for partial
permanent incapacity in that it was uncertain 88 to how much less
claimant could earn in suitable employment. Union Colliery Co. v. In-
dust. Comm. (Ill.)
Evidence held insufficient to sustain award for partial loss of use of leg.
Studebaker Corp. v. Warner (Ind.)..
Percentage of permanent partial loss of normal efficiency is ultimate fact
and may be determined by trial court from all evidence showing nature
and permanency of injuries and conditions before and after, without di-
rect evidence of such percentage. Knuffke v. Bartholomew (Neb.)...... 867
Notice to board of refusal to abide by its final decision is not condition pre-
cedent to suit. Southern Surety Co. v. Nelson (Tex.)
Jury, though waived, may be called to make special findings without in-
structions or verdict. Zwaduk v. Morris & Co. (Kan.).
Where there was evidence tending to show that employer was operating in
good faith under act and had taken out insurance approved by Board for
term not expired, question whether employee had right to pursue either
his remedy under act or action at law was question for' jury, and it was
error to instruct that he had such right Talge Mahogany Co. v. Bur-
rows (Ind.)
Though question whether contract of employment existed is one of mixed
law and fact if facts are disputed it is one purely of law if whole agree-
ment respecting alleged employment is in writing or if facts resepecting
employment are not in dispute. Rockefeller v. Indust. Comm. (Utah.).. 317
Question whether physician was informed that he must look to Employers'
Insurance Association, and not to employer, should have been submitted
to jury. Huddleston v. Texas Pipe Line Co. (Tex.).
If evidential facts are undisputed, question whether injured workman was
independent contractor or employee is for court, but if evidential facts
are disputed and reasonable minds can draw different conclusions from
them, then question is for jury. Coppes Bros. & Zook v. Pontius (Ind.) 495
#410. — INSTRUCTIONS.
Instruction that servant's election to choose between remedy under act and
action at law would continue until he elected to pursue one of the reme-
dies is not exact.-Where defense asserted, not only that plaintiff had
elected to accept compensation, but also that under facts he was not
entitled to such election. defendant was entitled to requested instruction,
informing jury that, if he failed to recover in that action, such failure
would not defeat his right to compensation. Talge Mahogany Co. v. Bur-
rows (Ind.)
TRIAL OR HEARING BY COURT-VERDICT AND FIND-
INGS.
Neither evidence nor findings show that, when he was kicked, workman was
in act of cleaning horse; statement that he was, found only in trial
judge's memorandum, is not equivalent of specific finding that such
was fact. Harris v. Kaul (Minn.)..........
411. —— JUDGMENT OR DECISION.
No estoppel arose in favor of insurer against insured employee who agreed
to accept lump sum settlement, employee having been without power
to contract in premises, as insurer knew, and justice court which ren-
dered judgment for such lump settlement having been without jurisdic-
tion to hear and determine issue Employers' Indemnity Corp. v. Woods
(Tex.)
When not challenged for fraud, courts are without authority to nullify
Integrity Mut. Casualty Co. of Chicago, Ill. v.
legislative declaration.
Nelson (Minn.)
EXECUTION AND ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT OR
1'422. — APPEAL OR OTHER PROCEEding for REVIEW.
In action at law for injuries to employee where plaintiff claimed employer
had failed to maintain insurance required. defendant was not prejudiced
by the court's refusal of his requested charge that action was one at
common law. Talge Mahogany Co. v. Burrows (Ind.)....
Undertaking on certiorari Held to obligate surety to pay judgment for com-
pensation, and not merely costs and damages.-Undertaking on certio-
rari to review judgment held enforceable as common-law, obligation al-,
though its conditions are more onerous than would have been required
if statutory bond had been given to effect same purpose.-Undertaking
on certiorari to review judgment held
to
secure payment of install-
ments. Carlson v. American Fidelity Co. (Minn.)
Where finding of trial judge on question of dependency has evidence to sup-
port it, judgment awarding compensation must be affirmed. Halbeisen
v. H. Koppers Co. (N. J.)
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.)
Findings of fact, by trial judge will not be disturbed if they are supported
by evidence. Geizel v. Regina Co. (N. J.).....
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS.
Requirement for filing statement or stenographic report with commission
is directory-such report may be amended. Lawrence Ice Cream Co. v.
Indust. Comm. (Ill.)
Commission may close case or keep it open. Moray v. Indust, Comm. (Utah) 747
3 415.
Medical testimony taken ex parte is not to be made foundation of decree un-
til it is produced in evidence, so that either party may have opportunity
to explain or contradict it. Gauthier v. Penobscot Chemical Fiber Co.
(Me.)
Where commission's decision refusing compensation became final on failure
to bring it up for review by court, commission had no jurisdiction, by
subsequent hearing, to review and set aside the decision. Centralia
Coal Co. . Indust Comm. (111)
Award may be sustained without specific finding of all jurisdictional and
ultimate facts where evidence in record shows jurisdiction of parties
and contains sufficient evidence.-Award will not be set aside by reason
of clerical error of commission in findings. Snyder v. Indust. Comm.
(Ill.)
Commission's findings must be based on evidence. Gauthier v. Penobscot
Chemical Fiber Co. (Me.)
Claim held to support award for total disability.-Full board may increase
compensation award on appeal by employer. Margenovitch v. Newport
Mining Co. (Mich.)
Requisites of commisioner's findings defined. Orsinie v. Torrance (Conn.)... 353
Opinion of Industrial Commission has no place in its findings and should not
be incorporated therein. Clark v. Voorhees (N. Y.)
Invalidity of order declaring business within act available to employer not-
withstanding failure to appeal. State v. Eyres Storage & Distributing
Co. (Wash.)
Fact that relation of employer and employee existed must be found or find-
ings will not sustain award. Coppes Bros. & Zook v. Pontius (Ind.).
State Industrial Commission may not set aside its decision denying claim for
compensation. Conley v. Upson Co. (N. Y.)
Findings may be made after an appeal has been taken from a decision, but
finding that employer had waived employee's failure to file his claim
within a year afte the accident, by not raising objection within reason-
able time, will be disregarded. Kraemer v. Mergenthale Linotype Co.
N. Y.)
Specific findings by commission
required. Moray v. Indust. Comm.
(Utah)
Record in proceedings held not to show case within maritime jurisdiction-
award not subject to collateral attack for want of jurisdiction. Taylor
v. Rober Ramsay Co.
Commission is without jurisdiction to hear petition for review without agreed
statement of facts or stenographic report filed within time set. People
ex rel. Oelsner v. Andrus (Ill.)
Findings of commissioner should state ultimate facts.
Bridgeport (Conn.)
Commission's finding that disability was compensable held sufficient London
Guar. & Acc. Co. v. Indust, Acc. Comm. (Colo.)..
Direct finding of ultimate fact warranting compensation held not affected by
ngative finding as to accident. Geo. L. Eastman Co. v. Indust. Acc.
Comm. (Cal.)
Award must determine persons entitled to compensation.
v. Indust. Comm. (IIL)
Question of empoyment in maritime occupation defeating jurisdiction under
act held for jury. Taylor v. Robert Ramsay Co. (Md.).
REVIEW BY COURT IN GENERAL.
(1). Nature and form of remedy.
Supreme Court of Appeal without jurisdiction of appeal from Industrial Com-
mission. Richmond Cedar Works v. Harper (Va.)
Review of board's award of certiorari is within jurisdiction of superior court.
Eugene Dietzgen Co. v. Indust, Comm. (III.).
Court held without jurisdiction of compensation appeal lodged in county of
hearing instead of county of injury. Maguire's Case (Me.).....
Certification of questions of law.
Certiorari is remedy for review. Bruening v. Central Warehouse Lumber
Co. (Minn.)
Award without proof of injury in employment is vcid and. being attacked by
certiorari, must be annulled as in excess of jurisdiction. Clapp's Park-
ing Station v. Indust. Acc. Comm. (Cal)
Review of award of arbitrator may be had where there is only partial dis-
ability after a short period of total disability, and award gives com-
pensation for total disability for full period of eight years. Strong v.
Sonken-Galamba Iron & Metal-Co. (Kan)
Reconsideration of claim held not appealable "award" or "decision". Krae-
mer v. Mergenthaler Linotype Co. (N. Y.)
Insurer, not appealing, cannot complain of award. Kabel v. Lane Enginoer-
ing Co. (N. Y.)
Employer is not estopped to question correctness of award by paying amount
found due at time award is made, where award provides for weekly pay-
ments thereafter. Strong v. Sonken-Galamba Iron & Metal Co. (Kan.).. 224
Parties.
It is not necessary to serve claimant with notice of certiorari. North Beck
Mining Co. v. Indust, Comm. (Utah)...
(3%). Proceedings for appeal or other form of review.
(4.) Presentation and reservations of grounds of review.
Specific objections before commission waived other questions. Nastacos V.
Orfan (N. Y.)
740
Superior court held to have jurisdiction to inquire into and decide whether
notice had been given as required by statute. Chisholm's Case (Mass.). 246
(4%). Transfer of cause.
There can be no appeal from decision of Commission after time limit has
expired. Richmond Cedar Works v. Harper (Va.).
Entry of case in superior court after expiratoin of 10 days from giving of
notice of decision of Board confers no right of appeal on any party.-
Notice of award to one not counsel of record held insufficient. Chis-
holm's Case (Mass.)
Failure of losing party to perfect appeal after notice thereof by filing of
suit within statutory period is abandonment of appeal and administra-
tion of claim rests with Board as if no notice had been given. Millers
Indemnity Underwriters v. Hayes (Tex.)
Notice of final action on claim held given for purpose of appeal. Grant v.
State Indust. Accident Comm. (Ore.)..........
Supreme Court, in case appealed from Board, must consider whether there
was any evidence to support findings of Board and court below, and, if
there is, whether law has been properly applied thereto. Strohl v. East-
ern Pa. Rys, Co. (Pa.)
Commission's record is presumed to speak truth-court cannot assume that
arbitrator's finding of want of notice was clerical error. Ridge Coal Co.
v. Indust. Comm. (Ill.)
Commissioner's incorrect ruling as to burden of proof was not "fraud” or
matter involving jurisdiction-court can only recommit case to commis-
sioner who has adopted erroneous rule as to burden of proof. Flint v.
City of Eldon (Iowa.)
On employer's appeal from award of death compensation based upon par-
tial dependency of claimant, claimant could not claim that she was
wholly dependent on decedent; she being in no position to claim more
than was awaded, not having assigned error or asked for writ of certi-
orari. Kostamo v. H. G. Christman Co. (Mich.).......
![[blocks in formation]](https://books.google.com.pe/books/content?id=Ub-GAAAAIAAJ&output=html_text&pg=PT26&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&q=Industrial+Commission&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U0Ito82aQs1tavIZmX8KHeigBiWhQ&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=268,878,384,26)
Where facts are not in dispute, issue whether employer was assenting em-
ployer so far as operation in which employee injured is concerned is one
of law, and commission's finding thereon is reviewable by court. Four-
nier's Case (Me.)
Construction of written contract to determine whether injured was inde-
pendent contractor or employee is matter of law which is reviewable in
courts on appeal from Board. Kelley v. Delaware, L. & Western R. Co.
(Pa.)
Question of dependency is one of fact but, where there is no dispute as to
facts, legal rights deducible or inferrable from such proven facts, are
questions of law. Hancock v. Indust. Comm. (Utah.)
Finding of commission that employee at time of accident was peforming
service growing out of employment is not binding on courts, construction
of statute being question of law. Radtke Bros. v. Indust. Comm. of
Wis. (Wis.)
Excessive compensation award reviewable as involving "lawfulness" and
Spreckels Sugar Co. v. Indust, Acc. Comm. (Cal.).
Questions of fact.
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.)
Findings of fact by commission cannot be disturbed by courts in absence of
fraud, but such findings must be grounded upon evidence presented under
such circumstances as to afford full opportunity for comment, explana-
tion, and refutation. Gauthier v. Penobscot Chemical Fiber Co. (Me.)..
Commission's findings are conclusive only where there is conflict of evidence
or opposing inferences may reasonably be drawn; award being based
wholly on circumstantial evidence, court may determine whether there
are necessary reasonable inferences deducible from evidence to sustain
findings. Clapp's Parking Station v. Indust. Acc. Comm, (Cal.).............
|