Crawford v. Parsons, No. 828

CourtSupreme Court of West Virginia
Writing for the CourtGIVEN
Citation141 W.Va. 752,92 S.E.2d 913
PartiesSanford CRAWFORD v. Virgil PARSONS. C. C.
Docket NumberNo. 828
Decision Date29 May 1956

Page 913

92 S.E.2d 913
141 W.Va. 752
Sanford CRAWFORD
v.
Virgil PARSONS.
C. C. No. 828.
Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.
Submitted April 11, 1956.
Decided May 29, 1956.

Page 914

Syllabus by the Court.

1. 'The title to an act of the Legislature which amends and reenacts a particular section, article and chapter of the Code by specific reference to them, and which relates to an object as to which, and as to the original section of the Code, the provisions of the act are not foreign, but are congruous and germane and such as might have been incorporated in the section when enacted, and which title is broad enough to give a fair and reasonable indication of the purposes, but does not disclose the details, of the act, satisfies the requirements of Section 30, Article VI of the Constitution of this State and is valid.' Point 3, Syllabus, City of Wheeling ex rel. Carter v. American Casualty Co., 131 W.Va. 584 [48 S.E.2d 404].

2. Section 6a of Article 2 of Chapter 136 of the 1949 Acts of [141 W.Va. 753] the Legislature, relating to immunity from liability of officers managers, agents, representatives and employees of employers who have elected to subscribe to the workmen's compensation fund, is not violative of due process.

Geo. R. Farmer, Morgantown, for plaintiff.

Jackson, Kelly, Holt & O'Farrell, David D. Johnson, Charleston, for defendant.

GIVEN, Judge.

Plaintiff, Sanford Crawford, instituted his action against defendant, Virgil Parsons, in the Circuit Court of Monongalia County for recovery of damages alleged to have resulted from negligence of defendant in the operation of an automobile in which plaintiff, at the time of injury, was riding as an invited guest. Defendant filed an amended plea in bar to the declaration and plaintiff demurred to the plea, setting up three grounds of demurrer. The trial court overruled the demurrer as to grounds 1 and 2 and sustained the demurrer as to ground 3. The trial court, on its own motion, certified its rulings on the demurrer to this Court.

The plea alleges that at the time of the injury 'both the Plaintiff and the Defendant were employees of the Isner Baking Company * * * and the Plaintiff was employed as Branch Manager of its Morgantown Branch, being a supervisor of eight men who were employed by [141 W.Va. 754] the Isner Baking Company, said Isner Baking Company being a large organization employed many other employees, and said Plaintiff, Sanford Crawford, was not an officer nor a stockholder of said Isner Baking Company, a corporation, but was merely an employee for the Isner Baking Company over whom the Isner Baking Company directed the manner of the execution of his service, and could discharge him at will, and the Defendant was employed as its Route Supervisor, and that at the said time of the said happenings mentioned in the Plaintiff's declaration, Plaintiff and Defendant were fellow employees and were engaged in the pursuit of the business of said Isner Baking Company, and that the said Defendant at the said time was operating his said automobile mentioned in the declaration in this case, as the agent and the employee of the said Isner Baking Company, upon company business for the said Isner Baking Company, and that said Plaintiff and Defendant as employees of the said Isner Baking Company were protected by the Workmen's Compensation Law of the state of West Virginia, since their employer Isner Baking Company, was a subscriber to said compensation fund, and that the said Plaintiff has been awarded compensation for the injuries received in the said action mentioned in said declaration, and has accepted payments from said Workmen's Compensation Fund for the aforesaid injuries, and that by virtue of the provisions of the laws of the state of West Virginia the immunity from liability for the matters and things set forth in Plaintiff's declaration extended to this Defendant, * * *'.

The grounds of the demurrer are: '1. Said plea alleges plaintiff was employed by Isner Baking Company as its Morgantown Branch Manager and Section 1, Article 2, Chapter 23, Code, specifically provides that 'Managers' shall not be deemed employees

Page 915

within the meaning of that chapter. 2. Section 6a of Article 2, Chapter 23, Code, extends exemption from liability for injuries to employees who are such employees within the meaning of that chapter. Plaintiff is not such employee. 3. Section 6a, [141 W.Va. 755] Article 2, Chapter 23, Code, was enacted as a part of Chapter 136, Acts of Legislature of West Virginia of 1949 and is unconstitutional * * *', for the reasons that the purposes thereof are not expressed in, nor germane to, the title of the Act, and therefore are violative of Section 30 of Article VI of the State Constitution; and that the same is violative of the due process clauses of the State and Federal Constitutions.

Points 1 and 2 of the demurrer may be considered together. They are based principally on the contention that plaintiff was not an employee within the meaning of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Deller v. Naymick, No. CC950
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 21, 1985
    ...his common law right to bring tort actions against other employees in return for immunity to their tort suits. See Crawford v. Parsons, 141 W.Va. 752, 759, 92 S.E.2d 913, 917 (1956). Moreover, a person may be a coemployee, for the purpose of immunity under W.Va.Code, 23-2-6a [1949], even th......
  • Estabrook v. American Hoist & Derrick, Inc., No. 84-411
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Hampshire
    • August 15, 1985
    ...Jadosh v. Goeringer, 442 Pa. 451, 275 A.2d 58 (1971); Hand v. Greyhound Corp., 49 Wash.2d 171, 299 P.2d 554 (1956); Crawford v. Parsons, 141 W.Va. 752, 92 S.E.2d 913 (1956); Oliver v. Travelers Insurance Co., 103 Wis.2d 644, 309 N.W.2d 383 (1981); Meyer v. Kendig, 641 P.2d 1235 These cases ......
  • Medical Care, Inc. v. Chiropody Ass'n of W. Va., No. CC827
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • May 29, 1956
    ...Court said: 'This Court should not, and will not, control the policy of the Legislature in the valid exercise of the police power of the [141 W.Va. 752] State pertaining to the public health. Our duty is simply to interpret the statutes of this State when they involve inconsistent provision......
  • Edwards v. Stark, 21-0589
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 17, 2022
    ...employees in return for immunity to their tort suits." Naymick, 176 W.Va. at 111, 342 S.E.2d at 76 (citing Crawford v. Parsons, 141 W.Va. 752, 759, 92 S.E.2d 913, 917 (1956)). --------- ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Deller v. Naymick, No. CC950
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 21, 1985
    ...his common law right to bring tort actions against other employees in return for immunity to their tort suits. See Crawford v. Parsons, 141 W.Va. 752, 759, 92 S.E.2d 913, 917 (1956). Moreover, a person may be a coemployee, for the purpose of immunity under W.Va.Code, 23-2-6a [1949], even th......
  • Estabrook v. American Hoist & Derrick, Inc., No. 84-411
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Hampshire
    • August 15, 1985
    ...Jadosh v. Goeringer, 442 Pa. 451, 275 A.2d 58 (1971); Hand v. Greyhound Corp., 49 Wash.2d 171, 299 P.2d 554 (1956); Crawford v. Parsons, 141 W.Va. 752, 92 S.E.2d 913 (1956); Oliver v. Travelers Insurance Co., 103 Wis.2d 644, 309 N.W.2d 383 (1981); Meyer v. Kendig, 641 P.2d 1235 These cases ......
  • Medical Care, Inc. v. Chiropody Ass'n of W. Va., No. CC827
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • May 29, 1956
    ...Court said: 'This Court should not, and will not, control the policy of the Legislature in the valid exercise of the police power of the [141 W.Va. 752] State pertaining to the public health. Our duty is simply to interpret the statutes of this State when they involve inconsistent provision......
  • Edwards v. Stark, 21-0589
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 17, 2022
    ...employees in return for immunity to their tort suits." Naymick, 176 W.Va. at 111, 342 S.E.2d at 76 (citing Crawford v. Parsons, 141 W.Va. 752, 759, 92 S.E.2d 913, 917 (1956)). --------- ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT