Glantz v. City of Lincoln, 31243.
Citation | 300 N.W. 572,140 Neb. 515 |
Decision Date | 24 October 1941 |
Docket Number | No. 31243.,31243. |
Parties | GLANTZ v. CITY OF LINCOLN ET AL. |
Court | Supreme Court of Nebraska |
GLANTZ
v.
CITY OF LINCOLN ET AL.
No. 31243.
Supreme Court of Nebraska.
Oct. 24, 1941.
“When a city, pursuant to agreement, furnished certain equipment, material, supplies, superintendence and other items for use on a Works Progress Administration project, but had no authority to control the details of the work, or to direct the mode and manner of doing it, the city is not liable for the payment of benefits under the workmen's compensation law for injuries suffered by an employee on the project.” Williams v. City of Wymore, 138 Neb. 256, 292 N.W. 726.
Appeal from District Court, Lancaster County; Broady, Judge.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by William W. Glantz, employee, opposed by the City of Lincoln, alleged employer, and the Travelers Insurance Company, workmen's compensation carrier for the city. From a judgment denying compensation, the claimant appeals.
Affirmed.
[300 N.W. 573]
Clifford L. Rein, of Lincoln, for appellant.
Clarence G. Miles, Hall, Cline & Williams, and Flavel A. Wright, all of Lincoln, for appellees.
Heard before SIMMONS, C. J., and ROSE, EBERLY, PAINE, CARTER, MESSMORE, and YEAGER, JJ.
YEAGER, Justice.
This is an action under the Workmen's Compensation Law of the state of Nebraska. Comp.St.1929, § 48-101 et seq. The action is by William W. Glantz, plaintiff and appellant, against the city of Lincoln, Lancaster county, Nebraska, alleged employer of plaintiff, and the Travelers Insurance Company, a corporation, the workmen's compensation carrier for the city of Lincoln, defendants and appellees.
The plaintiff was, from August 29, 1939, to and including December 14, 1939, a Works Progress Administration employee and was engaged in projects which were in and for the benefit of the city of Lincoln. From some time in September he was engaged with other employees in street marking. The particular duty of plaintiff was the spreading of tar. To do this work he carried in his left hand a bucket weighing from 60 to 75 pounds, and with his right hand he brushed or spread the tar. On December 14, 1939, while he was spreading tar on M. street, between Eleventh and Thirteenth streets, he claims that he picked up the bucket and “snapped” his back, felt pain therein, and could not straighten up, and that he has been completely disabled from performance of any work since that date, although in his testimony he admits that he was employed on WPA as late as February, 1940. He claims...
To continue reading
Request your trial