Anderson v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co.
| Decision Date | 08 December 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. 66,66 |
| Citation | 40 N.W.2d 209,326 Mich. 429 |
| Parties | ANDERSON et al. v. KROGER GROCERY & BAKING CO. et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Before the Entire Bench.
Alexander, Cholette, Buchanan, Perkins & Conklin, Grand Rapids (Edward D. Wells, Grand Rapids, of counsel), for defendants and appellants.
Harold H. Smedley, Muskegon, for plaintiffs and appellees.
Defendants appeal from an order of the department of labor and industry awarding to plaintiffs dependency compensation and also medical and funeral expenses. The controlling question is whether the decedent's presence on the street at the time of the fatal accident arose out of and in the course of his employment, as found by the commission.
Robert V. Anderson was the manager of the Kroger Grocery & Baking Company store in the village of Grant, Michigan, for eleven years up to and until the time when he met with fatal injuries upon being struck by an automobile while he was returning from Johnies' restaurant to the Kroger store. Plaintiffs, widow and minor children of decedent, claim that the injury arose out of and in the course of his employment. Defendants claim that decedent was injured while on a personal mission not within the ambit of his employment.
The duties of decedent varied and the manner in which he performed them was left largely to his discretion. He was often on the street on business errands, including trips to the bank and to the postoffice. Among his other outside activities for the store were visits to the creamery to purchase and pick up butter, the occasional delivery of groceries to a few nearby farms and to the restaurant, and the purchase of vegetables and fruits. He was not engaged in these particular activities at the time of the accident.
In the village of Grant, Front street and M-37 run north and south parallel to each other and a block apart, with M-37 on the east. The Kroger store is located on the northwest corner of Front street and Lincoln street. Johnie's restaurant is on the east side of M-37, about a block and a half from Kroger's. Across from Johnie's restaurant is a shortcut through vacant property and a well worn traveled path, that runs to the store.
Testimony shows that the main business in and about Grant is the raising and selling of fresh vegetables, particularly onions; and further, that about 75 per cent of the area's transactions in onions, as well as some of those in other vegetables, were made in Johnie's restaurant over a cup of coffee.
Decedent opened the Kroger store, in which there was no telephone, at about 8 o'clock each morning and customarily each morning went to Johnie's restaurant at about 9 o'clock or shortly thereafter to have toast and coffee, his first food of the day. He did not take breakfast at home. He would transact any business that could be done while there, including the occasional purchase of vegetables and the solicitation of grocery orders. John Morrison, proprietor of Johnie's restaurant, would give him grocery orders on the average of twice weekly. The evidence does not indicate that the company had any objection to his trips to the restaurant. The testimony shows that the company's district manager would go there with him when he was in Grant.
On the morning in question decedent remained in the restaurant for about 7 or 8 minutes, partook of his usual fare, and received a grocery order from the owner. He was in a hurry to return to the store and was offered a ride back by a friend who had a car parked across M-37. He was run down while crossing the highway. The facts are not clear as to whether he intended to accept the ride or walk across the short-cut.
An injury arises out of and in the course of the employment when it occurs while engaged in the duties of the employment and it has a rational causal connection to the work. See Murphy v. Flint Board of Education, 314 Mich. 226, 22 N.W.2d 280, for an extensive collection of authorities and a fuller discussion. The proper test to be applied in this and similar cases is concisely stated by Chief Justice Cardozo in Dependents of Marks, Dependents v. Gray, 251 N.Y. 90, 167 N.E. 181, 183, as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial