Hoosier Veneer Company v. Stewart

• Decision Date: 21 December 1920
• Docket Number: 10,828
• Citation: 129 N.E. 246,76 Ind.App. 1
• Parties: HOOSIER VENEER COMPANY v. STEWART ET AL
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

129 N.E. 246

76 Ind.App. 1

HOOSIER VENEER COMPANY v. STEWART ET AL

No. 10,828

Court of Appeals of Indiana

December 21, 1920

Rehearing denied February 23, 1921.

Petition for transfer dismissed May 31, 1921.

From the Industrial Board of Indiana.

Proceedings for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act by John Stewart and others against the Hoosier Veneer Company. From an award for applicants, the defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Joseph W. Hutchinson, for appellant.

Frank B. Ross and Edward H. Knight, for appellees.

OPINION

DAUSMAN, P. J.

It appears from the finding of facts that one Harold Stewart was employed by the Hoosier Veneer Company and entered upon his work July 29, 1919; that on August 6, 1919, he received a personal injury by accident, arising out of and in the course of the employment, and resulting in his death on said date; that he was sixteen years and twenty-four days of age at the time of his death; and that he was the son of the appellee John Stewart. The proceedings before the Industrial Board resulted in an award of compensation to the father at the rate of $ 9.075 per week.

Appellant presents two contentions for our determination: (1) that the facts found do not show dependency; and (2) assuming that an award in some amount was proper, the board erred in fixing the amount of the weekly payments.

The question of dependency is one of fact to be determined from the evidence. § 38 Workmen's Compensation Act, Acts 1919 p. 158. The board did not find specifically that the appellees were dependents. Instead of finding the ultimate fact of dependency, the board has set out the evidential facts. However, the only legitimate inference to be drawn from the evidential facts is that the appellees are dependent. While it was the duty of the board to have found the ultimate fact specifically, yet since the board has acted on that inference, and in view of the attitude of the parties with respect thereto, we will not return the case to the board and require it to make a specific finding on that point, but will treat the evidential facts as the equivalent of the ultimate fact.

The evidence tends fairly to prove that appellees were partial dependents. See In re Stewart (1920), 72 Ind.App. 463, 126 N.E. 42.

It is conceded that Harold's wages were fixed by agreement at $ 16.50 per week, and at that rate his total earnings were $ 20.73. The entire amount so earned he...