Keser v. U.S.S. Lead Refinery, Inc., 13302.
| Decision Date | 21 November 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 13302.,13302. |
| Citation | 163 N.E. 621,88 Ind.App. 246 |
| Parties | KESER v. U. S. S. LEAD REFINERY, Inc. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Industrial Board.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Mike Keser, to recover for injuries received during the course of his employment, opposed by the U. S. S. Lead Refinery, Inc., his employer. The Industrial Board denied compensation and dismissed the claim for want of jurisdiction, and claimant brings error. Affirmed.
McAleer, Dorsey, Gillett & Clark, of Hammond, for appellant.
Wm. J. Whinery, of Hammond, for appellee.
Appellant filed his claim for compensation against appellee for injuries sustained by him by reason of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. To this claim appellee filed an answer in two paragraphs; the first paragraph being in general denial, and the second paragraph alleging that appellant's claim was not filed within two years from the date of injury. To the second paragraph of answer, appellant filed a reply, alleging, in substance: That, with the intention to cheat and defraud the appellant, the appellee falsely and fraudulently represented to appellant that, if he would not take any action or actions of any kind, nature, or character against the appellee company for the injuries sustained by him, or would not consult any lawyer or lawyers in connection therewith, the appellee company would furnish him with employment for the rest of his natural life; that the appellant relied upon the promises and statement so made by the appellee, through its servants, agents, and employees, and did not bring or cause to be brought any actions against the appellee, and did not consult any lawyer or lawyers with reference to his claim, but accepted and relied upon the promises so made to him by the appellee company; that on August 4, 1925, the appellee gave the appellant employment until and including October 24, 1927, on which date the appellee discharged appellant.
Upon the facts shown by the evidence, the Industrial Board found that on and prior to December 27, 1924, the appellant was in the employ of appellee at an average weekly wage of $27.09; that on said date appellant received a personal injury by reason of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with appellee; that prior to August 4, 1925, the appellee, through its representative, did represent to appellant that, if he would not file any claim against appellee, said appellee would provide appellant with employment for life; that appellant relied upon said representations, and did not file his claim within two years from the date of his injury.
Appellant was denied compensation, and said claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
The error assigned is that the award is contrary to law.
The result of this case depends upon whether or not the Industrial Board has equity jurisdiction and therefore authority to make an award on a claim for compensation filed after the expiration of two years from the date of claimant's injury.
Section 9469, Burns' 1926 Statutes, reads as follows:
“The right to compensation under this act shall be forever barred unless, within two years after the injury, or, if death results therefrom, within two years after such death, a claim for compensation thereunder shall be filed with the Industrial Board.”
This court has repeatedly held that the Industrial Board is not a court; that it is merely an administrative body. In the case of Raggi v. H. G. Christman Co., 151 N. E. 833, the court, on page 834, says:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial