Deardorff v. City of East Chicago

• Decision Date: 22 October 1943
• Docket Number: 17130.
• Citation: 50 N.E.2d 926,114 Ind.App. 102
• Parties: DEARDORFF et al. v. CITY OF EAST CHICAGO.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

50 N.E.2d 926

114 Ind.App. 102

DEARDORFF et al. v. CITY OF EAST CHICAGO.

No. 17130.

Appellate Court of Indiana, in Banc.

October 22, 1943

Sevald & Sevald, of Hammond, for appellants.

Ross McCord, Ice & Miller, of Indianapolis, for appellee.

DOWELL Judge.

This was a cause brought by appellants as dependents of Raymond Deardorff, deceased, before the Industrial Board of Indiana upon a claim for compensation for the death of appellants' decedent whose death, it was alleged, was the result of an accident which arose out of and in the course of decedent's employment with the appellee, City of East Chicago, Indiana.

The cause was heard before a single member of the Industrial Board, resulting in a denial of compensation, whereupon, on application of appellants, it was reviewed by the full board with the same result.

Appellants assign but one error, i.e., that the award of the full Industrial Board of Indiana is contrary to law. This assignment presents both the question of the sufficiency of the finding to support the award of the Industrial Board and of the evidence to support the finding. Weir v. Coridan, 1941, 108 Ind.App. 589, 31 N.E. 2d 83; Prest-O-Lite Co., Inc., v. Stone, 1935, 100 Ind.App. 480, 196 N.E. 352.

The finding of the full Industrial Board has the same force as the finding of a court or the verdict of a jury and the question of whether appellants' decedent's death was the result of an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment with the appellee, or was due to other causes, was a question of fact for the determination of the Board, and in considering the question of whether the evidence supports the finding of the Board this court will consider only evidence favorable to the Board's decision and inferences reasonably to be drawn therefrom; and whenever the Board reaches a legitimate conclusion from all the evidence and from such inferences its finding cannot be reversed by this court even though we might prefer another conclusion equally legitimate. McFarland v. Commonwealth Life Ins. Co., 1939, 107 Ind.App. 13, 22 N.E.2d 881.

The evidence most favorable to the decision of the Board is as follows:

Decedent was employed as an animal keeper by appellee at Washington Park in East Chicago, Indiana, where appellee maintained about seventy-six wild animals. Decedent's duty was to care for these animals and to clean their quarters. On May 6 1941, decedent became wet, whether due entirely to rain which was falling at the time or to the breaking of a hose with which he was flushing the animal house, or to both causes, the evidence is in conflict. There is some testimony also that at the time said hose broke decedent fell, striking his side against an animal cage. Shortly thereafter, on the same day he returned to his home feeling ill where he remained under the care of his wife until May 11, 1941, when h...