In re Boyer

• Decision Date: 25 October 1917
• Docket Number: No. 10076.,10076.
• Citation: 117 N.E. 507,65 Ind.App. 408
• Parties: In re BOYER.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

65 Ind.App. 408

117 N.E. 507

In re BOYER.

No. 10076.

Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 1.

Oct. 25, 1917.

Certified Questions from State Industrial Board.

Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act wherein William Boyer claims compensation for injuries, opposed by Edward A. Lane, employer. Certified from the Industrial Board of Indiana on a question of law. Decided in favor of employé.

HOTTEL, C. J.

The Industrial Board of Indiana has certified to this court, under section 61 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (Acts 1915, c. 106, p. 411), the following statement of facts, and questions of law based thereon:

“On the 16th day of July, 1917, and for many years prior thereto, Edward A. Lane was the owner of a wheat and oats threshing equipment, consisting of a traction engine, a separator and a straw blower, which he operated upon the custom basis in threshing wheat and oats for farmers in the eastern part of Boone, and the western part of Hamilton counties, in the state of Indiana; that said threshing outfit was moved from farm to farm by said Lane, and the wheat and oats of the farmers threshed at so many cents per bushel; that in the operation of said threshing equipment the said Lane had William Boyer in his employment, for a number of years as one of the separator hands, at an average weekly wage of $18; that on the 16th day of July, 1917, the said Lane was threshing wheat, with said equipment, for a Hamilton county farmer, and at said time William Boyer was working under his employment as one of the separator hands; that on said date, while engaged in the discharge of the duties of his employment, the right hand of William Boyer was caught in the cylinder and his arm drawn into the machine and his arm crushed off above the elbow joint. Boyer claims compensation for 200 weeks at the rate of $9.90 a week, on account of the loss of his arm. Lane admits that he is entitled to compensation at said rate and for said period, if the Indiana Workmen's Compensation Act applies.”

Upon the foregoing facts, the Industrial Board certifies for our determination the following questions of law:

“(1) Is William Boyer, upon the foregoing facts, entitled to an award of 200 weeks' compensation, at the rate of $9.90 per week, against Edward A. Lane?

(2) Upon the foregoing facts, was William Boyer a farm laborer, within the meaning of the Indiana Workmen's Compensation Act, at the time of his injury?”

The question presented is controlled by that part of section 9 of the Compensation Act which provides as follows:

“This act *** shall not apply to casual laborers, to farm or agricultural laborers and to domestic servants, nor to employers of such persons. ***”

Under the facts above stated, was Mr. Boyer at the time of his injury employed as a farm or agricultural laborer within the meaning of said provision?

[1][2] In construing or interpreting an act of the Legislature the courts may take into consideration the general scope and purpose of the act and the condition that prevailed at the time of its passage. Board, etc., v. Given, 169 Ind. 468, 483, 80 N. E. 965, 82 N. E. 918;Hughes v. Indiana Union Traction Co., 57 Ind. App. 202, 105 N. E. 537, and cases cited. The purpose of the act, as indicated by its title, was to prevent industrial accidents, and to provide compensation and adequate medical and...