Barry v. Sanders Co.
| Decision Date | 14 May 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 37965,37965 |
| Citation | 211 Miss. 656,52 So.2d 493 |
| Parties | BARRY v. SANDERS CO. et al. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
L. Arnold Pyle, Jackson, for appellant.
Vardaman S. Dunn and Lotterhos & Dunn, all of Jackson, J. H. Keyer, Natchez, for appellees.
This action was brought under our Workmen's Compensation Law. Laws 1948, Chapter 354, as amended. Appellant was employed by the Sanders Company as a door-to-door salesman in the City of Natchez. He was paid on a commission basis, and used a truck belonging to his employer in which he carried supplies and merchandise. His duties involved both sales and the collection of accounts.
On August 17, 1949, appellant returned, after completion of his day's work, to the Magnolia Inn, where he resided. The time of his return was variously testified to as being between 7:15 p. m. and 9 p. m. Barry proceeded to his room, and drew a bath, preparatory to changing clothes and returning to town for supper. When the bath was finished, he heard a noise outside, such as would be made by someone tampering with the doors of the truck. Dressing hastily, he went downstairs to look into the matter, but finding no one he got in the truck and 'drove around to see if I could see anybody that looked supicious.' Thereupon, he sought out a cafe to carry out his original purpose to eat supper.
Upon his return to the Magnolia Inn, he locked the truck and was proceeding to his room when he was set upon by two assailants who beat him into unconsciousness and ransacked his pockets, taking therefrom about fifty-five dollars.
Claims for compensation was filed against the employer and the Western Casualty & Surety Company, the insurer. The claim was denied by the attorney-referee and this finding was approved by the commission, and from a judgment of affirmance by the circuit court this appeal is taken.
It will be at once perceived that the issue narrows beyond the requirement that the injury, if compensable, must arise 'out of and in the course of employment' and is restricted in cases of personal assault, to injuries 'directed against an employee because of his employment, while so employed and working on the job'. Section 6998-02(2), 5 Miss.Code Supp. p. 301, Laws 1948, c. 354, Sec. 2(2).
Liability under the Workmen's Compensation Law is not to be adjudged by common law principles wherein negligence or wrongful act is a controlling factor. Yet the status of the employee as such at the time of the injury may be revealed by the light from our decisions which have supplied helpful analogies.
Let us take the theory most favorable to the case for appellant. Although his original claim omitted any reference to a purpose to seek out and solicit collection of a past due account owed his employer, such intent was later added to the original statement which included as objective for his nocturnal trip only a desire to detect those who had molested the doors of the truck and to procure a sandwich and a bottle of beer.
Illustrative of the common law cases are Richberger v. American Express Company, 73 Miss. 161, 18 So. 922, 31 L.R.A. 390, 55 Am.St.Rep. 522, where the agent or servant was held to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Big "2" Engine Rebuilders v. Freeman
...a nexus between the injury and employment. The base line is simply a rational connection of employment and injury. In Barry v. Sanders, 211 Miss. 656, 52 So.2d 493 (1951), although denying compensation, we held the issue of whether a claimant was assaulted "because of his employment, while ......
-
Brookhaven Steam Laundry v. Watts, 38055
...1936, 66 App.D.C. 160, 85 F.2d 417. This is consistent with the apparent legislative intent, and with our opinion in Barry v. Sanders Co., Miss. 1951, 52 So.2d 493, where the relationship between these two provisions was not an issue and therefore not It is manifest that Watts was killed 'i......
-
Johnson v. Pearl River Sand & Gravel Co.
...& Pearson, Inc. v. Hargrove, 222 Miss. 64, 75 So.2d 277; American Surety Co. v. Cooper, 222 Miss. 429, 76 So.2d 254; Barry v. Sanders Co. et al., 211 Miss. 656, 52 So.2d 493; Dillon v. Gasoline Plant Construction Corp., 222 Miss. 10, 75 So.2d 80; California Eastern Airways v. Neal, 228 Miss......
-
Estate of Oatis v. Williamson & Williamson Lumber Co.
...it aside. Malley v. Over The Top, Miss., 90 So.2d 678; Sones v. Southern Lumber Company, 215 Miss. 148, 60 So.2d 582; Barry v. Sanders Co., 211 Miss. 656, 52 So.2d 493; Deemer Lumber Company v. Hamilton, 211 Miss. 673, 52 So.2d 634; Thornton v. Magnolia Textiles, Inc., Miss., 55 So.2d 172; ......