Brinson v. Bd. of Com'rs of Owen Cnty.

• Citation: 186 N.E. 891,97 Ind.App. 354
• Decision Date: 19 September 1933
• Docket Number: No. 14981.,14981.
• Parties: BRINSON v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF OWEN COUNTY.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

97 Ind.App. 354

186 N.E. 891

BRINSON

v.BOARD OF COM'RS OF OWEN COUNTY.

No. 14981.

Appellate Court of Indiana, in Banc.

Sept. 19, 1933.

Appeal from Industrial Board.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Alva Brinson, alleged employee, opposed by the Board of Commissioners of Owen County, alleged employer. From award of the Industrial Board, denying compensation, alleged employee appeals.

Affirmed.Q. Austin East and Corr & Bowen, all of Bloomington, for appellant.

Slaymaker, Merrell & Locke, of Indianapolis, for appellee.

BRIDWELL, Judge.

Appellant, on the 13th day of February, 1932, was a duly appointed, qualified, and acting assistant county highway superintendent of Owen county, Ind. On that day, while walking along and over one of the highways under his jurisdiction, he was struck by an automobile being driven over such highway, and seriously injured. He thereafter filed with the Industrial Board his application for adjustment of his claim for compensation, alleging therein that his injuries were received by reason of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by appellee. Such further proceedings were had that the full board, by a majority of its members, made a finding and award against him, denying compensation. This appeal followed; the error assigned being that the award is contrary to law.

The finding of the board is as follows:

“The full Industrial Board of Indiana having heard the argument of counsel and having reviewed the evidence and being thereby duly advised in the premises, a majority of the members of said board find that on February 13th, 1932, the plaintiff received a personal injury arising out of an accident, and as a result thereof the plaintiff was totally disabled.

“The said members find from the evidence that the plaintiff, at the time of receiving said accidental injury, was a public official and was not an employee within the meaning of the Indiana Workmen's Compensation Act; and the finding herein should be for the defendant.”

It is apparent from the finding made that the award in favor of appellee is based on the grounds that appellant, under the facts proven by the evidence, was not an employee within the meaning of the term as used in the Compensation Law of this state. There is evidence to prove that at the time of his injury appellant was acting in the line of his duty as such assistant superintendent; that he had been duly appointed to such position, and had served as such assistant superintendent during the year immediately preceding the accident; that he had given bond for the faithful performance of his duties, as required by statute, and had taken an oath that he would honestly, faithfully, and impartially discharge the duties of assistant superintendent of highways; that he verified claims of himself and others for...