Industrial Com'n of Colorado v. Hunter

• Decision Date: 02 April 1923
• Docket Number: 10574.
• Citation: 73 Colo. 226,214 P. 393
• Parties: INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF COLORADO et al. v. HUNTER.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

214 P. 393

73 Colo. 226

INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF COLORADO et al. v. HUNTER.

No. 10574.

Supreme Court of Colorado

April 2, 1923

Error to District Court, Pueblo County; James A. Park, Judge.

Proceeding by Edna May Hunter, widow of William T. Hunter, deceased, in behalf of herself and Louis E. Hunter, and other minor children of William T. Hunter, deceased, under the Workmen's Compensation Act, for compensation for death of William T. Hunter, opposed by the State of Colorado emplóyer, and the State Compensation Fund, insurer. Judgment for claimants, on appeal from the Industrial Commission of Colorado, and the Industrial Commission and the employer and insurer bring error.

Affirmed.

Findings of fact in a workman's compensation proceeding, having competent testimony to support them, are conclusive on review.

Russell W. Fleming, Atty. Gen., and Joseph P O'Connell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for plaintiffs in error.

Hughes Langdon & Barbrick, of Pueblo, for defendant in error.

TELLER C.J.

The defendants in error were claimants under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Laws 1919, p. 700), as dependents upon William Hunter, deceased who was, at the time of his death, a water commissioner residing at Rye, Colo. He was killed while riding in an automobile from his home to Pueblo, in company with one Parks. The circumstances of the killing are recited in Industrial Commission v. Pueblo Co., 71 Colo. 425, 207 P. 479. The Commission found that the killing did not arise out of his employment, though he was at the time acting in the course of his employment. The district court of Pueblo county held that, under the findings of fact made by the Commission, Hunter's death was the result of an accident arising out of his employment, and directed an award accordingly. That judgment is now before us for review.

The Commission found that:

'His (Hunter's) duties were to keep a record of the amount of water in the daily flow, and make reports to the divsion engineer once a week. In performing his duties it was necessary that the travel over his district; for this purpose he used an automobile. On the afternoon of April 11, 1919, Elton C. Parks, salesman of the Pueblo Automobile Company, called at the home of Hunter and obtained his order for a Dodge car. Parks was driving a new Dodge car and invited Hunter to go to Pueblo with him. Hunter's report was due April 12, 1919, and in order to make this report he had to look at the ditches and creeks between his home and Pueblo. By coming to Pueblo with Mr. Parks he could do the necessary work along the road. It was while on his way from his home at Rye to Pueblo that he was shot by the Bosco brothers. Parks was the first man killed in the attempt to steal the automobile, and Hunter was then killed by the Bosco brothers in order to secure possession of the automobile.'

Hunter was driving the car.

We must accept the findings of the Commission and they show that Hunter was killed while in the line of his employment. The only remaining question is, Did the killing arise out of said employment? In the case of Industrial Commission v. AEtna Life Co., 64 Colo. 480, 174 P. 589, 3 A.L.R. 1336, one Lynch was killed in an automobile accident while going from one place of work to another place to work, by the direction of his employer. We there held that his death arose out of his employment.

The Commission found that Hunter was traveling on the public road for the purpose of doing work required by his employment as water commissioner. It would seem that the case just quoted is authority for the judgment of the district court. In this case, as in that, the deceased was traveling on a public road in the discharge of his duties as an employee. It is not possible to lay down any rule of universal application. Each case must stand, to a considerable degree, upon its facts. There are...