Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., No. 20314

Docket NºNo. 1
Citation212 N.E.2d 903, 138 Ind.App. 193
Case DateJanuary 11, 1966
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

Page 903

212 N.E.2d 903
138 Ind.App. 193
Joseph Karl HENDRICKSON, Appellant,
v.
CONTRACTING & MATERIAL CO., Appellee.
No. 20314.
Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 1.
Jan. 11, 1966.

[138 INDAPP 194] Norman R. Newman, of Dann, Backer & Pecar, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Richard W. Guthrie, of Murray, Stewart, Irwin & Gilliom, Indianapolis, for appellee.

CARSON, Judge.

This is an appeal from an award from the full Industrial Board of Indiana, affirming an award of the hearing member. The claim was originally filed on form 9 and the application for review on form 16. Following the affirmance by the full board, the appellant filed his bill of exceptions containing the evidence which was signed by the chairman of the board and thereafter filed as part of this appeal.

From the ruling of the full board the appellant assigns as error that the award of the full board was contrary to law. This assignment presents the entire case for our consideration.

The evidence presented to the board consisted of testimony of three witnesses, the appellant, plaintiff below, Dr. Everett G. Grantham by deposition and Les Johnson, a steward on the job where the appellant was employed. The appellee offered no evidence.

This being an appeal from a negative finding of the Industrial Board under an assignment that the award of the board was contrary to law requires us to consider only the evidence most favorable to the appellee. Rauh & Sons Fertilizer Co. v. Adkins et al. (1955), 126 Ind.App. 251, 129 N.E.2d 358.

[138 INDAPP 195] The question upon which the case turned below is whether or not from the evidence the condition complained of by the appellant was the result of accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment. The finding of the hearing member which was affirmed by the full board was in substance that the plaintiff did not sustain an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment and that any impairment or disability which he might have at the present time or will have in the future is wholly unrelated to his employment.

[2, 3]

Page 904

The Industrial Board as the trier of the facts and the right to believe that evidence which it finds creditable and by the same token the right to disbelieve such evidence as it does not find worthy. The board apparently did not feel that this case came within the principles heretofore announced by this court in the cases of Standard Cabinet Co. v. Landgrave (1921), 76...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Duncan v. George Moser Leather Co., No. 2-479A112
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • August 28, 1980
    ...regarding the extent and character of his injury. . . ." (Citations omitted) In Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., (1966) 138 Ind.App. 193, 195, 212 N.E.2d 903, 904, the claimant presented evidence at the hearing before the Board, but his employer presented no evidence. Judge Carson......
  • Rensing v. Indiana State University Bd. of Trustees, No. 2-680A206
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • June 16, 1982
    ...this Court is required to consider only that evidence most favorable to the Trustees. Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., (1966) 138 Ind.App. 193, 212 N.E.2d 903. In considering such evidence, this Court cannot weigh the evidence nor determine the credibility of witnesses before the ......
  • Dennison v. Martin, Inc., No. 2-479A100
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • October 23, 1979
    ...regarding the extent and character of his injury. . . ." (Citations omitted) In Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., (1966) 138 Ind.App. 193, 195, 212 N.E.2d 903, 904, the claimant presented evidence at the hearing before the Board, but his employer presented no evidence. Judge Carson......
  • Spoon v. ATF Logistics, LLC, No. 30A04–1412–PL–571.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • November 13, 2015
    ...and by the same token the right to disbelieve evidence it does not find worthy. See Hen drickson v. Contracting & Material Co., 138 Ind.App. 193, 195, 212 N.E.2d 903, 904 (1966).[8] That is so even if an item of evidence is not expressly or directly denied or refuted:[E]ven though a particu......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Duncan v. George Moser Leather Co., No. 2-479A112
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • August 28, 1980
    ...the extent and character of his injury. . . ." (Citations omitted) In Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., (1966) 138 Ind.App. 193, 195, 212 N.E.2d 903, 904, the claimant presented evidence at the hearing before the Board, but his employer presented no evidence. Judge Carson,......
  • Rensing v. Indiana State University Bd. of Trustees, No. 2-680A206
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • June 16, 1982
    ...Court is required to consider only that evidence most favorable to the Trustees. Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., (1966) 138 Ind.App. 193, 212 N.E.2d 903. In considering such evidence, this Court cannot weigh the evidence nor determine the credibility of witnesses before the I......
  • Dennison v. Martin, Inc., No. 2-479A100
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • October 23, 1979
    ...the extent and character of his injury. . . ." (Citations omitted) In Hendrickson v. Contracting & Material Co., (1966) 138 Ind.App. 193, 195, 212 N.E.2d 903, 904, the claimant presented evidence at the hearing before the Board, but his employer presented no evidence. Judge Carson,......
  • Spoon v. ATF Logistics, LLC, No. 30A04–1412–PL–571.
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • November 13, 2015
    ...and by the same token the right to disbelieve evidence it does not find worthy. See Hen drickson v. Contracting & Material Co., 138 Ind.App. 193, 195, 212 N.E.2d 903, 904 (1966).[8] That is so even if an item of evidence is not expressly or directly denied or refuted:[E]ven though a par......
  • 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