Klettke v. C. & J. Commercial Driveaway, Inc.

• Decision Date: 02 June 1930
• Docket Number: No. 125.,125.
• Citation: 250 Mich. 454,231 N.W. 132
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: KLETTKE v. C. & J. COMMERCIAL DRIVEAWAY, Inc., et al.

250 Mich. 454

231 N.W. 132

KLETTKE

v.C. & J. COMMERCIAL DRIVEAWAY, Inc., et al.

No. 125.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

June 2, 1930.

Certiorari to Department of Labor and Industry.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Law by Mae Klettke, claimant, for the death of her husband, Henry Klettke, opposed by the C. & J. Commercial Driveaway, Incorporated, employer, and the Columbia Casualty Company, insurance carrier. The Department of Labor and Industry awarded compensation to claimant, and the employer and insurance carrier bring certiorari.

Affirmed.

Argued before the Entire Bench.

Bishop & Weaver, of Detroit, for appellants.

H. H. Warner, of Lansing, for appellee.

FEAD, J.

This is certiorari to an award of the Department of Labor and Industry, granting compensation to the widow of Henry Klettke.

Defendant C. & J. Commercial Driveaway, Inc., is engaged in driving automobiles from the factory to points of delivery. Decedent Henry Klettke was employed as a foreman, with supervision over the drivers. He superintended a driveaway of automobiles from Lansing to Indianapolis. He and the men attended the automobile races at Indianapolis on May 30. Some of them started back to Lansing that afternoon, in a car provided by defendant. There was not room in the car for decedent and two other employees. They remained overnight, and the next morning took a street car to the intersection of United States Highway 31, with the intention of taking passage on a bus. While they were waiting, a Mr. Bryan invited them to ride with him as far as South Bend, Ind. Before reaching South Bend, Mr. Bryan's car was wrecked in a collision with another car. Decedent was hurt and died from the injuries.

Decedent had charge of the men conducting the driveaway. It was his business to see that they performed their duties properly. He took care of the expenses of the men and himself out of money advanced by the employer, collected the license plates, and was responsible for their return to the employer's office at Lansing. It was his duty to report at Lansing upon the cars delivered and the money expended. He had authority to hire and discharge men on the road, and that authority continued while on his way back to Lansing. No specific directions had been given him or the men to return by train, bus, or in any other particular way, but the manner of return was left to the discretion of decedent. It was a condition of his employment that he should return to Lansing. He was exposed to all the dangers of traveling on the highway, a danger which was incident to his employment.

In its general aspects, the case is ruled by Widman v. Murray Corporation of America, 245 Mich. 332, 222 N. W. 711. The Michigan Workmen's Compensation Law is applicable, although the injury occurred out of the state. Act No. 173, Pub. Acts 1921, § 19; Crane v. Leonard....