Fed. Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Havolic

Decision Date01 February 1916
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court


Appeal from Circuit Court, Dane County; E. Ray Stevens, Judge.

Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act by John Havolic for compensation for personal injury, opposed by the Federal Rubber Manufacturing Company, employer. From an award of the Industrial Commission in favor of the claimant, the employer appealed to the circuit court. The award was confirmed, and the employer appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Dane county confirming an award of the Industrial Commission in favor of the respondent Havolic under the Workmen's Compensation Act. Wis. Stats. 1915, §§ 2394--1 to 2394--31.

The essential facts are not disputed. Havolic worked for the plaintiff in its rubber tire factory; his duties being to feed stock into a tubing machine. In the department in which he worked there was a compressed air system with hose and nozzles attached for use in some of the factory operations, but Havolic had no duty which required him either to use or come in contact with the system or the hose. Employés were forbidden to use the hose for the purpose of cleaning their clothes, and Havolic knew of the prohibition, but many employés did do so and on the evening of the accident Havolic, on quitting work, took down the hose from its place and began to use it to blow the dust from his clothing. He had cleaned a part of his clothing when a fellow workman came up and (whether of his own motion or at Havolic's request is a matter in dispute), took the hose from Havolic's hand, and proceeded to clean his (Havolic's) back. The air in the hose was at a pressure of nearly or quite 80 pounds, and the fellow workman, apparently by way of practical joke, held the nozzle to Havolic's rectum, with the result that the intestines were ruptured. Havolic was compelled to go to the hospital for several weeks, and was totally disabled for 17 weeks. For these injuries the award complained of was made.

Robert R. Freeman and Henry J. Bendinger, both of Milwaukee, for appellant.

W. C. Owen, Atty. Gen., and Winfield W. Gilman, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents.

WINSLOW, C. J. (after stating the facts as above).

[1] This court has endeavored to give to the Workmen's Compensation Act a broad and enlightened construction, to the end that it may accomplish to the fullest extent its beneficent purpose. It is to be remembered, however, that this purpose was to compensate for injuries resulting from one class of accidents only,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
41 cases
  • Crilly v. Ballou, 32
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • July 15, 1958
    ...will be both fights and horseplay.' See, also, Burns v. Merritt Engineering Co., 302 N.Y. 131, 96 N.E.2d 739. 4) Federal Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Havolic, 162 Wis. 341, 156 N.W. 143, L.R.A.1916D, 968. This case was overruled in Badger Furniture Co. v. Industrial Commission, 195 Wis. 134, 217 N.W.......
  • Crane v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • January 27, 1971
    ...Co. (1933) 187 Minn. 600, 246 N.W. 254; Payne v. Industrial Commission (1920) 295 Ill. 388, 129 N.E. 122; Federal Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Havolic (1916) 162 Wis. 341, 156 N.W. 143; In re Loper (1917) 64 Ind.App. 571, 116 N.E. 324; Stark v. State Industrial Acc. Commission (1922) 103 Or. 80, 204 ......
  • Kansas City Fibre Box Co. v. Connell
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • March 25, 1925
    ...588, 158 P. 256, Ann. Cas. 1918B, 354; Western Indemnity Co. v. Pillsbury et al., 170 Cal. 686, 151 P. 398; Federal Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Havolic et al., 162 Wis. 341, 156 N. W. 143, L. R. A. 1916D, 968; Pierce v. Boyer-Van Kuran Lumber & Coal Co., 99 Neb. 321, 156 N. W. 509, L. R. A. 1916D, 9......
  • Twin Peaks Canning Co. v. Industrial Commission of Utah
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Utah
    • March 10, 1921
    ...... Kansas C. S. Co. , 104 Kan. 90, 177. P. 522, and Judson Mfg. Co. v. Ind. A. C. . (Cal.) 184 P. 1. In some of the foregoing cases ... cited the following cases: Federal Rubber Mfg. Co. . v. Havolic , 162 Wis. 341, 156 N.W. 143, L. R. A. 1916D, ......
  • 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