In re Winborne

Citation244 P. 135,34 Wyo. 349
Decision Date23 February 1926
Docket Number1340
PartiesIn Re WINBORNE. v. McCRACKEN [*] SNYDER, State Treasurer
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wyoming

ERROR to District Court, Natrona County; BRYANT S. CROMER, Judge.

In the matter of the claim of E. B. Winborne for compensation as employee of the Fargo Western Oil Company. An order of the district court allowed compensation to Harry McCraken official court reporter, to be paid out of the Industrial Accident Fund, for a transcript of proceedings in the case appealed under the Workmen's Compensation Law, and John M. Snyder, as State Treasurer, brings error.

Reversed.

David J. Howell, Attorney General, and Ray E. Lee, Special Assistant Attorney General, for plaintiff in error.

Workmen's Compensation Law requires the official court reporter to attend hearings and report the evidence; 4327 C. S. Also to supply transcripts for appeals; 4328 C. S. The compensation law, having made provision for the payment of specific costs it also apparently intended that no other costs would be paid from the fund, since the question of costs is purely statutory. Irrigation Co. v. La Porte, 26 Wyo 522-528; 15 C. J. 21; Nelson v. Industrial Insurance Dept. (Wash.) 176 P. 15. The State Treasurer is not liable for the costs in question.

Nichols and Stirrett for defendant in error.

Compensation of court reporters is provided for by Sec. 1172 C. S., as amended by Ch. 102, laws 1921; transcripts being prepared as a rule on the reporter's own time, it was the intention of this amendment that fees for transcripts should be retained by court reporters; this applies to all transcripts; 4330 C. S., as amended by Ch. 65, laws of 1921, provides for the payment from the "Accident Fund" of "contingent expenses" incurred in the administration of the compensation law. Section 4331, C. S., as amended by Chap. 124, laws 1925, defines the purpose of the provision charging the accounts of employers in the Industrial Accident Fund, to be the encouragement of care in prevention of accidents; fees of reporters are expenses and not costs, under the terms of the act. Administrative expenses are to be distinguished from costs. If the verdict be against the employer in contested claims, the costs are chargeable to his account. If the claim be denied, the costs of the proceedings are chargeable to the Accident Fund as administrative expense. The act does not provide that transcripts shall be furnished without cost. The statute gives the State Treasurer a right to appeal, even though he was not made a party to the proceedings in the District Court. The Treasurer incurs no personal liability.

OPINION

Per Curiam.

The question in this case is as to whether or not an official court reporter is entitled to charge for a transcript of the proceedings made by him in a case appealed under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The District Court allowed such charge in the case at bar in the sum of $ 56.25, and ordered the same paid out of the Industrial Accident Fund. From such order the State Treasurer has appealed.

It is conceded by both parties herein that unless an express provision may be found in the statutes of this state, authorizing the payment aforesaid, the court's order was erroneous. The official court reporter is an officer under the laws of this state and receives an annual salary of $ 2400, in addition to certain fees provided by law, and it is not denied that the legislature might lawfully impose upon him the duty of making such transcripts free of cost. The question is whether that had been done.

Section 4328, W. C. S. 1920, a part of the Workmen's Compensation Law, provides as follows:

"In case an appeal to the supreme court is prosecuted on behalf of the injured workman, the county and prosecuting attorney or other attorney, representing said workman shall order a transcript of the record of the hearing and proceeding to be prepared by the official court reporter of the district wherein said injury occurred, and duly certified without cost to said injured workman. * * * In case an appeal be prosecuted on behalf of the employer, the record of the proceedings at the original hearing shall be supplied without cost to such employer."

The foregoing provisions are plain and unequivocal, and under them the cost of a transcript can be charged neither to the injured workman nor to the employer. It is contended however, that such cost is a contingent expense within the meaning of section 4330, W. C. S. 1920 (amended by c. 65, Sess. L. 1921), which provides that "all contingent expenses incurred in preparing for and in the administration of this act shall be paid from the Industrial Accident Fund." But to "administer" the law, as here mentioned, seems to refer to the performance of ministerial acts, rather than to any steps taken to enforce, or resist the enforcement of, the law, and it would seem clear that an appeal to the supreme court, in connection with which a transcript of the proceedings in the trial court is required, is one of those steps. For many years the legislature has used the term "contingent expenses" in providing for the maintenance of the various offices in this state, intended to cover the different expenses in the administration of the various departments, and it is in this sense, we think, that the term was used in the section last quoted. The legislature, in the Workmen's Compensation Act, specifically provided for witnesses, jurors, medical and surgical supplies, and costs of investigation. The expenses in that connection are specifically provided to be paid out of the Industrial Accident Fund. Appeals to the Supreme Court were contemplated and provided for, and were undoubtedly considered certain to occur. The legislature had in mind the furnishing of transcripts in connection therewith, just as much as it had in mind the expense of witnesses, jurors, etc., but instead of providing for payment therefor out of the fund aforesaid, it provided that nothing should be paid therefor either by the injured workmen or the employer. It would seem clear, in view of these facts, that if the legislature, after...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Spriggs v. Clark
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 6 Octubre 1932
    ... ... the State. 25 R. C. L. 383, 6 R. C. L. 152; State v ... Irvine, 14 Wyo. 318; In re Fourth Judicial ... Dist., 4 Wyo. 133; Zancenelli v. Central C. & C ... Co., 25 Wyo. 511; State v. Carter, 30 Wyo. 22; ... State v. Read Co., 33 Wyo. 387; In re ... Winborne, 34 Wyo. 349; State v. Mercantile Co., ... 38 Wyo. 47; Midwest Hotel Co. v. State Bd. of ... Equalization, 39 Wyo. 461; Wyo. Central Irr. Co. v ... Farlow, 19 Wyo. 68. The presumption is in favor of the ... constitutionality of any statute. 6 R. C. L. 97, 104. The ... expediency and ... ...
  • State v. Cantrell
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 18 Noviembre 1947
  • Fox Park Timber Co. v. Baker
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 5 Diciembre 1938
  • State ex rel. Williams v. Musgrave
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • 2 Febrero 1962
    ...Ins. Fund, 30 Cal.2d 575, 184 P.2d 505, at 510; Middlebusher v. State Industrial Accident Comm., 147 Or. 459, 34 P.2d 325; In re Winborne, 34 Wyo. 349, 244 P. 135; State ex rel. Sherman v. Pape, 103 Wash. 319, 174 P. 468; Allen v. City of Omaha, 136 Neb. 620, 286 N.W. 916; Bordson v. North ......
  • 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