In re McPhee
Decision Date | 16 September 1915 |
Parties | In re McPHEE. In re LONDON GUARANTEE & ACCIDENT CO., Limited. |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Suffolk County.
Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act to obtain compensation for the death of Otis McPhee. Compensation was awarded, and the award was confirmed by the superior court, and the London Guarantee & Accident Company, the insurance company, appeals. Decree affirmed.
Thos. H. Buttimer, of Boston, for employé.
H. S. Avery, of Boston, for insurer.
The dependent of the deceased employé has suggested a question whether the case is rightly here, because it is provided by the Workmen's Compensation Act as amended by St. 1912, c. 571, § 14:
‘That there shall be no appeal from a decree based upon an order or decision of the board which has not been presented to the court within ten days after the notice of the filing thereof by the board.’
This does not mean that the case must be actually brought to the attention of a judge of the superior court within that time. It is a compliance with the statute if the required papers are presented to the court in the sense of being filed as a part of its records. The case is here rightly.
Otis McPhee was employed in the summer of 1913 as superintendent by the Atlantic Park Company, a subscriber under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The business of his employer was that of operating an amusement resort near Nantasket Beach in the town of Hull. In the performance of his duty as such employé, McPhee organized a fire brigade to protect the property of his employer. He was also a regular member of the fire department of the town of Hull and received for his services in that connection $50 per year, and was liable to a fine of 50 cents for an inexcusable absence from a fire. On the evening of June 22, 1913, fire broke out in a garage distant about 40 feet from the property of the subscriber.
The arbitration committee, whose findings have been confirmed by the Industrial Accident Board, reported that:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Meridian Grain & Elevator Co. v. Jones
... ... 325; ... Dove v. Alpena Hide & Leather Co., 198 Mich. 132, ... 164 N.W. 253; 20 A. L. R. 4; McGarry v. Industrial ... Commission, 290 Ill. 577, 125 N.E. 318; Balzer v ... Saginaw Beef Co., 199 Mich. 374, 165 N.W. 785; Peso ... v. Crucible Steel Co., 195 A.D. 288, 187 N.Y.S. 66; ... McPhee's case, 222 Mass. 1, 109 N.E. 633, 10 N. C. C. A.; ... Blackburn v. Coffeyville Vitrified Brick & Tile Co., ... 107 Kans. 722, 193 P. 351; Geizel v. Regina Co., 114 ... A. 328, 116 A. 924; Barron v. Texas Employers Ins. Assn., 36 ... S.W.2d 464 ... We also ... call the court's ... ...
-
Superior Oil Co. v. Richmond
...Western Coal & Mining Co. v. M'Callum, 237 F. 1003; Booth & Flynn v. Price, 183 Ark. 975, 39 S.W.2d 717, 76 A.L.R. 957; McPhee case, 222 Mass. 1, 109 N.E. 633, 10 C. C. A. 257. Whenever the evidence reasonably authorizes an inference supporting a material issue necessary for a recovery, it ......
-
Stevens v. Village of Driggs
... ... Lehigh Valley Coal Co., 296 Pa. 502, 146 A. 899; ... Sjoholm v. Hercules Powder Co., 227 Mich. 610, 199 ... N.W. 603; Roth v. Locust Mountain State Hospital, ... 130 Pa. Super. 1, 196 A. 924; A. Breslauer Co. v. Ind ... Comm. of Wis., 167 Wis. 202, 167 N.W. 256; In re ... McPhee, 222 Mass. 1, 109 N.E. 633; King v. Buckeye ... Cotton Oil Co., 155 Tenn. 491, 296 S.W. 3; ... Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Smith, Texas, 266 S.W ... 574; Heisler v. Lincoln Realty Co., 121 Pa. Super ... 516, 184 A. 305 ... [65 ... Idaho 737] Industrial Commission of Colorado v ... ...
-
In re Charon
...not attributableto any physical impact. See, for example, Brightman's Case, 220 Mass. 17, 107 N.E. 527, L.R.A.1916A, 321;McPhee's Case, 222 Mass. 1, 109 N.E. 633; Mooradjian's Case, 229 Mass. 521, 118 N.E. 951;Bergeron's Case, 243 Mass. 366, 137 N.E. 739;Johnson's Case, 279 Mass. 481, 181 N......