Brooks v. Essex Warehouse Co.
| Decision Date | 08 October 1947 |
| Docket Number | No. 223.,223. |
| Citation | 136 N.J.L. 297,55 A.2d 665 |
| Parties | BROOKS v. ESSEX WAREHOUSE CO. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Sophie Brooks, claimant, to recover compensation for death of her husband, opposed by Essex Warehouse Company, employer. To review a judgment of Common Pleas Court reversing award of the Compensation Bureau in favor of claimant, the claimant brings certiorari.
Judgment of Court of Common Pleas reversed and findings of Bureau affirmed.
.
The proofs, in this case examined, justify a finding of death by accident arising out of and in the course of the employment
October term, 1947, before BODINE, HEHER and WACHENFELD, JJ.
Avidan & Avidan, Sara M. Lewitt and Alexander Avidan, all of Newark, for prosecutor.
Kalisch & Kalisch and Isidor Kalisch, all of Newark, for defendant.
This is a workmen's compensation case The widow had judgment in the Bureau which was reversed in the Court of Common Pleas. The case comes before us for review on certiorari, and it becomes our duty to find the facts.
The deceased had been employed as a laborer for 12 years by the defendant. On December 4, 1944, he had been working all day and was last seen by James Mullin, a fellow employee, on the first floor of the warehouse at approximately 8 o'clock in the evening. His body was found in the pit of the rear elevator shaft of the following morning. He was still wearing his working clothes. His face was in several inches of water. The cause of death, certified by the coroner, was fractured skull and drowning The elevator shaft was on the east side of the building. To the rear of this was the men's wash room to which many of the employees went before leaving the building. The practice was to leave only a very dim light after closing. Such was the case when the decedent was last seen. The elevator was of the usual warehouse type, without self-closing doors or safety devices of any kind. The distance from the first floor to the pit, where the deceased was found, was between 12 and 15 feet.
The learned and experienced Deputy Commissioner of Compensation found:
‘I have determined that when the decedent was in the area of the elevator shaft he was in the course of his employment.
‘I have further determined that the presence of the body bearing injuries which would result from a fall down the elevator shaft raises a legitimate inference that petitioner's decedent died as a result of a fall down the elevator shaft.
‘I have further determined that, there being no evidence as to how he met his death, the circumstances were such that it is proper that I presume that decedent's death was the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.'
The determination was in accord with the finding in Mountain Ice Co. v. Durkin, 144 A. 6, 7, 6 N.J.Misc. 1111, 1113. In that case, it was said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Macko v. Herbert Hinchman & Son, A--98
...proof is particularly noticeable in Dominquez v. Markowitz, 169 A. 514, 12 N.J.Misc. 90 (Sup.Ct.1933), and Brooks v. Essex Warehouse Co., 136 N.J.L. 297, 55 A.2d 665 (Sup.Ct.1947), affirmed 137 N.J.L. 206, 59 A.2d 2 (E. & A.1948). It is observable in many other of our cases, such as Muzik v......
-
Valentine v. Walter Kidde & Co.
...after the last payment of compensation.’ There is no showing or allegation of any of the exceptions named in the statute. The time period 55 A.2d 665is jurisdictional. Miller v. Beller Electric Supply Co., 100 N.J.Eq. 444, 136 A. 342; Herbert v. Newark Hardware & Plumbing Supply Co., 107 N.......
- Brooks v. Essex Warehouse Co.