Little v. Atlas Drop Forge Co.
| Decision Date | 22 March 1923 |
| Docket Number | No. 76.,76. |
| Citation | 221 Mich. 604,192 N.W. 619 |
| Parties | LITTLE v. ATLAS DROP FORGE CO. et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Certiorari to Department of Labor and Industry.
Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Pub. Acts 1912 [Ex. Sess.] No. 10), by William Little, claimant, opposed by the Atlas Drop Forge Company, employer, and Michigan Employers' Casualty Company, insurer. The Department of Labor and Industry granted an award, and the employer and insurer bring certiorari. Affirmed.
Argued before WIEST, C. J., and FELLOWS, McDONALD, CLARK, BIRD, SHARPE, MOORE, and STEERE, JJ.Brown & Kelley, of Lansing, for appellants.
C. W. & W. S. Foster, of Lansing, for appellee.
This case is here for review on certiorari to the Department of Labor and Industry.
William Little was an employee of the Atlas Drop Forge Company of Lansing, His work was that of an operator of a drop forge hammer. A foreigner, one Tony Dombaski, was employed to carry steel axles to Little. On the 27th of April, 1922, he had occasion to give Dombaski some directions as to the placing of the material. This angered Dombaski, who replied with a vile epithet, and threatened violence, but went away, returning in about 20 minutes. When he returned, Little was bent over working at the furnace. Dombaski threw a rod of steel at him, striking him in the head and producing very serious injuries. Since that time he has been unable to work. The board awarded him compensation. The defendants are here asking to have that award vacated.
The only question involved is whether plaintiff's injuries arose out of his employment.
The claim of the defendants is stated by counsel in their brief as follows:
‘Appellants' position has been and is that this is not a case where compensation should be allowed; that it cannot be rationally and fairly said that the accidental injury arose out of the employment.’
The law applicable to the facts in this case is stated by Mr. Justice Bird in Marshall v. Baker-Vawter Co., 206 Mich. 466, 173 N. W. 191.
In that case the court lays down the test to be applied to cases where employees suffer injuries from assault while engaged in the employer's business. After citing numerous authorities from this and other jurisdictions, the court said:
As illustrative of this rule the following language from ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Early-Stratton Co. v. Rollison
... ... Ruppert, 218 N.Y ... 148, 112 N.E. 750; L. R. A. 1917A, 344; Little v. Atlas ... Drop Forge Co., 221 Mich. 604, 192 N.W. 619; Taylor ... ...
-
Stewart v. Chrysler Corp.
...355, 199 A. 653, and Schultz v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 256 Mich. 393, 239 N.W. 894, which, in turn, is planted on Little v. Atlas Drop Forge Co., 221 Mich. 604, 192 N.W. 619, as holding that when an assault is incidental to some duty of the assaulted person's employment his resulting injuries......
-
Glenn v. Reynolds Spring Co.
...that, had the finding of fact been otherwise, the plaintiff would have been entitled to compensation. In Little v. Atlas Drop Forge Co., 221 Mich. 604, 192 N. W. 619, the injury was inflicted by a fellow employee. No claim was there made that he was a ‘dangerous fellow’ or that his employer......
-
Schultz v. Chevrolet Motor Co.
...employment. Defendant cites Marshall v. Baker-Vawter Co., 206 Mich. 466, 173 N. W. 191, 192, and plaintiff cites Little v. Atlas Drop Forge Co., 221 Mich. 604, 192 N. W. 619. These cases are in harmony and recognize and quote the general rule stated in Jacquemin v. Manufacturing Co., 92 Con......