Alfredson v. Department of Labor and Industries, 28046.
Decision Date | 16 October 1940 |
Docket Number | 28046. |
Citation | 5 Wn.2d 648,105 P.2d 37 |
Parties | ALFREDSON v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES et al. |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Proceeding under the Industrial Insurance Act by Carl Alfredson claimant, opposed by the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company employer. From a judgment of the superior court reversing an order of the Department of Labor and Industries of the state of Washington, the Department of Labor and Industries and employer appeal.
Affirmed.
Appeal from Superior Court, Grays Harbor County; William E Campbell, judge.
L. B. Donley, of Aberdeen, for Weyerhaeuser Timber Co.
Smith Troy and Harry L. Parr, both of Olympia, for Department of Labor and Industries.
Harry Ellsworth Foster, of Olympia, and A. D. Gillies, of Aberdeen, for respondent.
This is an appeal by the Department of Labor and Industries and the Weyerhaeuser Timber Company from a judgment of the superior court, reversing an order of the department upon a claim for compensation under the Industrial Insurance Act. The claimant, Carl Alfredson, suffered an injury to his back while in the course of his employment as a tree faller. He presented his claim to the department and was allowed time loss without permanent partial disability by the supervisor of industrial insurance. From that order claimant appealed to the joint board, which, after a hearing, reversed the order of the supervisor and awarded forty degrees permanent partial disability. Being dissatisfied with the order of the joint board, claimant appealed to the superior court. The case, tried to a jury, resulted in a reversal of the departmental order. Motions for judgment n. o. v., or, in the alternative, for a new trial, were made and denied. Judgment was then entered upon the verdict, remanding the claim to the department, '* * * with instructions to classify the plaintiff's disability as a permanent total one, and to pay him the compensation provided by law for permanent total disability.'
The evidence taken Before the joint board and presented to the jury disclosed that Before the injury claimant was in good health; that he was injured by falling backwards upon and across a log at the time he was attempting to escape from a falling tree; that he was taken to a hospital where he stayed for about a month; and that since his injury he has suffered constant pain, has been unable to work, and has been compelled to wear a brace to support and protect his back. Respondent was examined by several doctors, among whom was Dr. K. L. Partlow who testified:
Eleven other doctors examined the claimant and testified at the hearings. Most of them agreed that the fall aggravated the pre-existing arthritis, but there was a conflict among them as to whether or not some other injury had been sustained and as to the extent of disability. The majority did not believe that there was any injury other than an aggravation of the arthritis, nor that the claimant was fully disabled. They decided that respondent was disabled to an extent of forty per cent.
Appellants contend (1) that the court erred in not granting a judgment n. o. v. to the defendant, because the claimant had not produced a preponderance of the evidence necessary to overthrow the statutory presumption that the decision of the department was correct; and (2) that the testimony in this cause conclusively shows that the department acted within its power, correctly construed the law and found the facts, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Omeitt v. Department of Labor and Industries
... ... insurance cases has the same force and effect as a verdict in ... actions at law. Alfredson v. Department of Labor & ... Industries, 5 Wash.2d 648, 105 P.2d 37; Calkins v ... Department of Labor & Industries, 10 Wash.2d 565, 117 ... ...
-
McLaren v. Department of Labor and Industries
... ... such cases as this, now have the same force and effect as in ... actions in law. Alfredson v. Dept. of Labor and ... Industries, Wash., 105 P.2d 37. Unfortunately for the ... appellant, chapter 184, page 579, Laws of 1939, so ... ...
-
Nelson v. Department of Labor and Industries
... ... any labor.' ... Within ... the rule laid down in Alfredson v. Department of Labor & ... Industries, 5 Wash.2d 648, 105 P.2d 37, the evidence was ... sufficient to take the case to the jury. That ... ...
-
Hastings v. Department of Labor and Industries
...11 Wash.2d 51, 118 P.2d 413; Roellich v. Department of Labor and Industries, 20 Wash.2d 674, 148 P.2d 957 . In the Alfredson case, supra [5 Wash.2d 648, 105 P.2d 39], the is expressed in the following language: 'The presumption of the correctness of the joint board's findings is for the con......