Kabai v. Majestic Collieries Co.
| Decision Date | 29 April 1941 |
| Parties | Kabai v. Majestic Collieries Co. et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
2. Workmen's Compensation. — An "opinion and order" of a referee of the Workmen's Compensation Board, which carried an appendix couched in the language of an award by the board of compensation for total temporary disability during a specified period, but which did not show that it had even been considered by a member of the board, was not an "award or final order" of the Workmen's Compensation Board or of any member thereof from which an appeal to the circuit court could be taken (Ky. Stats., sec. 4929).
3. Workmen's Compensation. — Where an "opinion and order" of referee of Workmen's Compensation Board had not been approved by board so as to constitute an award or final order of the board, and no such award had been made, claimant's motions for rehearing, treated by the board as petitions for review of the referee's opinion and recommendation of an award, were not subject to dismissal on the ground that they had not been filed in time (Ky. Stats., sec. 4929).
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court.
V.R. Bentley for appellant.
J.J. Moore for appellee.
Before Joseph D. Harkins, Special Judge.
Reversing.
The appellant, John Kabai, was injured in appellee's mine on July 17, 1937, by a rock falling on the back of his head and neck. On his claim for compensation therefor much medical testimony was taken by deposition, and on June 20, 1938, an "opinion and order" of a referee of the Workmen's Compensation Board was filed in which the referee discussed the testimony as to the claimant's injuries and conditions. He seems to have accepted as a fact the report of the company's doctor that Kabai was able to return to work six weeks and two days after he was injured although there was expert testimony to the contrary and Kabai did not in fact return to work, claiming that he was unable to do so on account of dizziness. His earnings as a coal loader had previously been quite high and he had a wife and four children dependent upon him. The referee expressed the view that his then and continuing dizziness and impairment in locomotion had previously existed; and, further, that the claimant had failed to sustain the burden of proof sufficient to warrant an award for disability resulting from the accident and injury other than for the six weeks. The opinion and "award" of the referee denied the claimant compensation other than for total temporary disability during that period. The opinion and report carried an appendix couched in the language of an award by the Board to that effect. On September 14, 1939, Kabai filed with the Board a motion "to grant a rehearing" in his case, setting up ten different grounds. Among them were that he is an uneducated Hungarian; that he had not received notice of the hearing of his case or of the award "so as to give him the right and privilege of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kabai v. Majestic Colleries Co.
...a final order of the board or one of its members, but was a mere opinion of the referee. The opinion in that case may be found in 286 Ky. 279, 150 S.W. (2d) 898. After the case was remanded, additional testimony was taken and the case resubmitted to the referee, who found the claimant to ha......
- Kabai v. Majestic Collieries Co.