Brollier v. Van Alstine

• Citation: 163 S.W.2d 109,236 Mo.App. 1233
• Parties: GLENN BROLLIER, EMPLOYEE, RESPONDENT, v. ROY B. VAN ALSTINE, EMPLOYER, APPELLANT, AND AMERICAN EMPLOYERS' INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURER, APPELLANT
• Decision Date: 25 May 1942
• Court: Kansas Court of Appeals

163 S.W.2d 109

236 Mo.App. 1233

GLENN BROLLIER, EMPLOYEE, RESPONDENT, v. ROY B. VAN ALSTINE, EMPLOYER, APPELLANT, AND AMERICAN EMPLOYERS' INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURER, APPELLANT

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas City

May 25, 1942

Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.--Hon. Albert A. Ridge, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Judgment affirmed.

James R. Sullivan and Arthur R. Wolfe for appellants.

(1) The Missouri Compensation Commission acted without or in excess of its powers in making the award and there was not sufficient competent evidence in the record, to warrant the making of the final award against Roy B. Van Alstine, as an individual, and the circuit court erred in affirming said final award. Kelly v. London Guaranty & Acc. Ins Co., 97 Mo.App. 623, 626-627, 71 S.W. 711; Clarke v Laird, 60 Mo.App. 289; Hollingshead v. Curtis, 14 N.J. Law 403; Henry v. Anderson, 77 Ind. 361; Robertson v. Corsett, 39 Mich. 777; Roop v Herron, 15 Neb. 73, 17 N.W. 353; Cross v. Bank, 17 Kan. 336; Secs. 3692, 3694, 3695, R. S. 1939; Denny v. Guyton, 327 Mo. 1030, 40 S.W.2d 562, 570-572; Robert v. Davis, 142 S.W.2d 1111, 1116; Sec. 3694, R. S. Mo. 1939; De May v. Liberty Foundry Co., 327 Mo. 495, 37 S.W.2d 640, 645; State ex rel. Melbourne Hotel Co. v. Hostetter, 344 Mo. 472, 126 S.W.2d 1189, 1192; Cummings v. Union Quarry & Const. Co. (Mo. App.), 87 S.W.2d 1039, 1041; Sec. 3689, R. S. Mo. 1939; Elihinger v. Wolfe House Furnishing Co. (Mo. App.), 72 S.W.2d 144, 148; 337 Mo. 9, 85 S.W.2d 11; Smith v. Kiel (Mo. App.), 115 S.W.2d 38, 39; Schneider v. Schneider, 146 S.W.2d 584, 587; Schultz v. Moerschel Products Co., 142 S.W.2d 106; Sec. 3697, R. S. Mo. 1939; Holmes v. Freeman, 150 S.W.2d 557; State ex rel. Mills v. Allen, 344 Mo. 743, 128 S.W.2d 1040, 1046; Sayles v. K. C. Structural Steel Co., 344 Mo. 756, 128 S.W.2d 1046, 1054. (2) The Commission was without jurisdiction and there was not sufficient competent evidence, to support its final award against Roy B. Van Alstine, as an individual, and for the same reasons the circuit court erred in affirming said award. Snorgrass v. Cudahy Packing Co., 229 Mo.App. 944, 947, 83 S.W.2d 226, 228; Crevisour v. Hendrix, 234 Mo.App. 1012, 136 S.W.2d 404, 412; Miller v. Ralston Purina Co., 341 Mo. 811, 816, 109 S.W.2d 866, 869; Secs. 3692, 3695, R. S. 1939; Barlow v. Shawnee Inv. Co., 229 Mo.App. 1, 48 S.W.2d 35, 45; Ebert v. Trimble, 333 Mo. 711, 720, 63 S.W.2d 83, 87; Secs. 3693, 3694, R. S. 1939; Francis v. Willits, 30 S.W.2d 203; Berry v. Adams, 71 S.W.2d 126; Raw v. Maddox, 93 S.W.2d 280; Secs. 3693, 3694, R. S. Mo. 1939. (3) The Commission erred as a matter of law in its finding and ruling that, the award must be against only Roy B. Van Alstine and his insurer. The liability of Roy B. Van Alstine and W. C. Anthony was joint and several under Sec. 3697, R. S. Mo. 1939. Sec. 3697, R. S. 1939; Maltz v. Chap Co., 336 Mo. 1000, 82 S.W.2d 909; Grote v. Realty Company, 96 S.W.2d 660; Secs. 3694, 3694a, R. S. 1939; Kelly v. Howard, 123 S.W.2d 584, 588. (4) Claimant's medical evidence, conclusively proved that he was paralyzed from the waist down and that his condition would be permanent. The award finding that employee will need additional medical attention was contrary to the medical evidence in the record, and the award requiring the employer and insurer to furnish him all the medical, surgical and hospital treatment that may be necessary to cure and relieve him in the future was clearly beyond the Commission's powers. Wilson v. Co. (Neb.), 278 N.W. 254; Millwood v. Mills (N. C.), 2 S.E.2d 560; Meuse's Case (Mass.), 169 N.E. 517; Block v. Bowers, 30 N.Y.S. 115; Sayles v. K. C. Structural Steel Co., 344 Mo. 769; Sec. 3701, R. S. Mo. 1939; Johnson v. Kruckemeyer, 224 Mo.App. 351, 29 S.W.2d 730; Union Iron Works v. Industrial Acc. Commission, 190 Cal. 33, 210 P. 410; State ex rel. Cook v. Kelly, 142 S.W.2d 1091, 1095; State ex rel. Mills v. Allen, 344 Mo. 755. (5) The Compensation Commission acted without or in excess of its powers and had no jurisdiction to construe the insurance policy as to its coverage and erred in its finding and award against the insurer. Kelly v. Howard, 233 Mo.App. 474, 123 S.W.2d 584, 585 and 587; State ex rel. Howard v. Martin, 141 S.W.2d 186; Bliss v. Lungstras Dyeing & Cleaning Co., 130 S.W.2d 198, 201; Soars v. Soars-Lovelace, Inc., 142 S.W.2d 866, 871; Liechty v. Kansas City Bridge Co., 155 S.W.2d 297, 301; Mitchell v. Taylor, 18 N.J. Misc. 255, 12 A.2d 851; Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. State Ind. Comm. (Okla.), 102 F.2d 607; Sec. 3744, R. S. Mo. 1939; Const. Mo., Art. VI, Sec. 1; Kelley v. Howard, 233 Mo.App. 474, 481, 123 S.W.2d 584, 587. (6) Even if the Workmen's Compensation Commission had jurisdiction to construe the insurance policy and to determine the question of coverage, the Commission erred in making its award against the insurer. Sec. 3697, R. S. 1939; Flowers v. Hill, 119 Okla. 275, 249 P. 704, 705; Kelley v. London Guaranty & Accident Co., 97 Mo.App. 623, 71 S.W. 711; National Auto. Ins. Co. v. Ind. Acc. Comm. (Cal.), 80 P.2d 928, 930, 1024; Serafino v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 122 N.J. L. 294, 4 A.2d 850; Hartigan v. Casualty Company of America, 227 N.Y. 175, 124 N.E. 789, 790; Germano v. Gresham F. & Acci. Ins. Soc. (1924), Vict. L. R. 592, 13 B. R. C. 157; Aetna Casualty & Surety Company v. Block, 142 S.W.2d 445, 447; Rendelman v. Levitt, 24 S.W.2d 211, 213; McNeill v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York, 335 Mo. 1142, 82 S.W.2d 582, 585; Morrison v. Terminal R. R. Ass'n, 57 S.W.2d 775; Winterbottom v. Kurn, 141 S.W.2d 93; Kelley v. Howard, 223 Mo.App. 474, 123 S.W.2d 584, 588; Soars v. Soars-Lovelace, Inc., 346 Mo. 710, 142 S.W.2d 866, 871; Chambers v. Macon Wholesale Gro. Co., 341 Mo. 1215, 70 S.W.2d 884, 885; 29 Am. Juris., Sec. 879 on Insurance; Myers v. Const. Cas. Co., 223 Mo.App. 781, 22 S.W.2d 867; Friedman v. Maryland Cas. Co., 71 S.W.2d 491; Bauman v. Western & So. Ind. Co., 77 S.W.2d 496; Murch Bros. Const. Co. v. Fid. & Cas. Co., 190 Mo.App. 490, 176 S.W. 399; Compton Heights Laundry Co. v. Gen. Acc., Fire & Life Assur. Corp., 195 Mo.App. 313, 190 S.W. 382; Secs. 3694 (c), 3715, R. S. 1939.

Spurgeon L. Smithson and Floyd R. Gibson for respondent.

(1) Van Alstine was a major employer within the meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Law and had elected to bring himself within said law. Cresivour v. Hendrix, 234 Mo.App. 1012, 136 S.W.2d 404; Progressive Building & Loan Association v. McIntyre, 169 Tenn. 491, 89 S.W.2d 336; Midland v. Lintin, 60 Neb. 249, 82 N.W. 866; Jackson v. Guss, 86 Kan. 280, 120 P. 353; Carpenter v. O'Kanagan County, 163 Wash. 18, 299 P. 400; Leilich v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 328 Mo. 112 40 S.W.2d 601; Burgstand v. Crowe Coal Co., 336 Mo. 119, 77 S.W.2d 97; Shroyer v. Mo. Livestock Comm. Co., 332 Mo. 1219, 61 S.W.2d 713; McVey v. Chesapeak & Potomac Telephone Co., 145 S.E. 578; Paucher v. Enterprise Coal Mining Co., 182 Iowa 1084, 164 N.W. 1035; Secs. 3692, 3693, 3695, R. S. Mo. 1939; Sonnenberg v. Berg's Market, 55 S.W.2d 494; Carrigan v. Western Radio Co., 44 S.W.2d 245; McFall v. Barton-Mansfield Co., 61 S.W.2d 911; Barlow v. Shawnee Inv. Co., 229 Mo.App. 51, 48 S.W.2d 35; Sec. 3764, R. S. Mo. 1939. (2) The employer is estopped to deny that the Compensation Commission had jurisdiction. Renick v. Mo. P. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.), 95 S.W.2d 872; L. E. Marks Co. v. Moore, 64 S.W.2d 426; Southern Underwriters v. Jones, 125 S.W.2d 393; Ham v. Mullins Lumber Co., 7 S.E.2d 712; Sunlight Coal Co. v. Floyd, 26 S.W.2d 530; Brown v. Chicago R. I. & P. R. Co., 231 Mo.App. 126, 98 S.W.2d 129; Newman v. Rice-Stix Dry Goods Co., 335 Mo. 572, 73 S.W.2d 264; 21 C. J. 1118, 1119, Sec. 121. (3) Van Alstine was an employer of Brollier and as such was liable under the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Act. Mechem on Partnership (2 Ed.), sec. 6, p. 8; Schneider v. Schneider, 146 S.W.2d 584; Secs. 3340, 3694, 3695, R. S. 1939; Gates v. Watson, 54 Mo. 585; Willis v. Barton, 143 Mo. 450, 45 S.W.2d 289; Frazier v. Radford, 23 S.W.2d 639; Sec. 3697, R. S. 1939; Schultz v. Moerschel Products Co., 142 S.W.2d 106; Holmes v. Freeman, 150 S.W.2d 557; Lee v. Oreon E. & R. G. Scott Realty Co., 96 S.W.2d 652. (4) The Commission had the right and jurisdiction to enter its award against the Insurer. (a) The Commission has jurisdiction to construe an admitted policy. Kelly v. Howard, 233 Mo.App. 474, 123 S.W.2d 584; Sec. 3715, R. S. 1939; Northwestern Casualty & Surety Co. v. Doud, 197 Wis. 237, 221 N.W. 766; Nilsson v. Nepi Bros., 9 A.2d 912, 919; Equitable Casualty Underwriters v. Industrial Comm., 322 Ill. 462, 153 N.E. 685, 71 C. J. 916; Schneider Workmen's Compensation Law (2 Ed.), sec. 464; Levine v. East N. Y. Elec. Corp., 206 N.Y.S. 527; State ex rel. Howard v. Martin, 141 S.W.2d 186. (b) Brollier was within the coverage of Van Alstine's policies. National Automobile Ins. Co. v. Industrial Comm., 81 P.2d 926; First National Trust & Savings Bank v. Industrial Accident Comm., 213 Cal. 322, 2 P.2d 347; Reed et al. v. Industrial Accident Comm. et al., 73 P.2d 1212; Klasing v. Fred Schmitt Contracting Co., 73 S.W.2d 1011; Secs. 3713, 3764, R. S. 1939. (c) The insurer has waived any defense of coverage under this policy. Serafino v. U. S. Fid. & Guaranty Co., 122 N.J. L. 294, 4 A.2d 850; Weir v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co., 20 A.2d 12; Royle Mining Co. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 126 Mo.App. 104, 103 S.W. 1098; Cowell v. Employers' Indemnity Corp., 326 Mo. 1103, 34 S.W.2d 710. (5) The award of the Commission as to additional medical attention was amply supported by the evidence and Commission had authority and jurisdiction to make an award allowing a total permanently injured employee medical, surgical and hospital treatment that may be reasonably necessary to cure and relieve him from the...