Kronick v. McLean Cnty.
| Decision Date | 16 June 1925 |
| Docket Number | No. 4904.,4904. |
| Citation | 204 N.W. 839,52 N.D. 852 |
| Parties | KRONICK v. McLEAN COUNTY. |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
The defendant county had contracted with an individual for certain work to be done upon the courthouse, the compensation to be at a stated rate per hour. The person with whom the contract was made employed the plaintiff and others. The plaintiff was injured while doing work embraced within the contract between the county and such third person. This action is brought against the county under the Workmen's Compensation Law, chapter 162 of the Laws of 1919. It is held:
The relation of employer and employee must exist in order to hold a noncomplying employer to liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
It is held, for reasons stated in the opinion, that the relation of employer and employee did not exist between the defendant county and the plaintiff in the instant case.
Appeal from District Court, McLean County; J. A. Coffey, Judge.
Action by Peter Kronick against McLean County under the Workmen's Compensation Act. From a judgment of dismissal, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.W. L. Smith, of Bismarck, for appellant.
George P. Gibson, State's Atty., of Washburn, and Hyland & Foster, of Bismarck, for respondent.
This action was brought against the defendant the county of McLean, as an employer, under chapter 162 of the Laws of 1919, the Workmen's Compensation Act. The plaintiff complains on account of injuries received by falling from the roof of the courthouse while painting or staining shingles, and predicates the liability of the county upon its failure to comply with the law by contributing to the Workmen's Compensation Fund. At the conclusion of the testimony offered for the plaintiff, the trial court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the action. The appeal is from the judgment.
[2] In June, 1923, the defendant county entered into a written contract with one Aune under which the latter undertook to “perform the duties of repairing” the courthouse and the county jail. The contract enumerated the particulars in which he was to repair the building and the compensation that he was to receive as follows:
“This agreement, made this 5th day of June, 1923, by and between County of McLean and Ole B. Aune of Wilton, N. D., party of the second part, witnesseth:
That the party of the second part hereby agrees to and with the party of the first part, for the consideration hereinafter named to well and faithfully perform the duties of repairing as hereinafter enumerated, in a workmanlike manner and according to the usual course of repair, and to use due care and prudence in protecting property and persons while so engaged, on the property of the party of the first part situated on block eight of the Riverview addition to the city of Washburn, McLean county, North Dakota, known as the Courthouse Building and the County Jail Building.
And the said party of the second part further agrees to perform the following duties, to wit:
(1) Painting and Staining; and Repair.-Repair and stain all shingles on the buildings named above; replace all broken and rotten shingles; securely nail all loose or warped shingles. Repair and paint all cornices on the buildings named above, replacing parts necessary. Paint and repair all windows, replacing broken panes and nailing loose casings and frames. Also to clean all windows on the outside.
(2) To act under the general supervision of the county commissioners and the county auditor and to perform additional repair work as either of these parties see fit.
(3) The said party of the second part further agrees to perform the above service at the rate of .75 per hour.
(4) The said party of the first part agrees to make payment in full on completion of the work as named above.
In testimony whereof, both parties have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year hereinbefore written.”
To do the work stipulated for, Aune hired seven men, including the plaintiff, each of them to receive 65 cents per hour. Directionsfor doing the work upon the courthouse were given to Aune by the county auditor. On one or two occasions the plaintiff overheard the county auditor giving Aune directions, but any directions given to the plaintiff came from Aune.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burkhardt v. State
...Woods v. Hughes Oil Co., 58 N.D. 581, 226 N.W. 586; Lilly v. Haynes Co-op. Coal Mining Co., 50 N.D. 465, 196 N.W. 556; Kronick v. McLean County, 52 N.D. 852, 204 N.W. 839.' Another important factor and as an incident of the right of control is the right to hire and discharge workmen. Bernar......
-
State for Benefit of Workmen's Compensation Fund v. E. W. Wylie Co., 7288
...of employer and employee must exist in order to make the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act applicable. See Kronick v. McLean County, 52 N.D. 852, 204 N.W. 839; Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. State, 71 N.D. 78, 298 N.W. 773, 138 A.L.R. 1115; Groff v. State, 72 N.D. 554, 9 N.W.2d 406; Sta......
-
the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York v. State
... ... to the earlier negligence cases. In Kronick v. McLean ... County, 52 ND 852, 204 NW 839, where the determinative ... question was as to ... ...
-
Mut. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. State, 6686.
...and the courts, in passing upon the question, have generally looked for guidance to the earlier negligence cases. In Kronick v. McLean County, 52 N.D. 852, 204 N.W. 839, 840, where the determinative question was as to whether the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant county or the empl......