Mains v. J. E. Harris Co, C. C. No. 585.

CourtSupreme Court of West Virginia
Writing for the CourtRILEY
Docket NumberC. C. No. 585.
PartiesMAINS. v. J. E. HARRIS CO.
Decision Date15 March 1938

197 S.E. 10

MAINS.
v.
J. E. HARRIS CO.

C. C. No. 585.

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

March 15, 1938.


[197 S.E. 10]

Rehearing Denied May 23, 1938.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. A minor who is not prohibited under general law from working in employments covered by the Workmen's Compensation Act, Code 1931, chapter 23, and who may bind himself, under that act, by remaining in one of such employments, after notice that his employer is a subscriber to the compensation fund, is sui juris for the purpose of making an election between the fund and an action at law where he had no notice, either actual or constructive, until after the injury, that his employer was in fact a subscriber.

2. The filing of claims for hospital bills and nurse hire with the compensation commissioner, on the forms provided by the latter, is sufficient to show that the employee, after injury, had actual notice that the employer was a subscriber to the fund, and such action of the employee is ipsa facto an election on his part to rely upon the act, and is a bar to recovery at common law.

Certified from Circuit Court, Wood County.

Action of trespass on the case by Thomas Mains, an infant, 18 years of age, against the J. E. Harris Company, for injuries sustained by the plaintiff while in the defendant's employ. The court sustained a demurrer to the defendant's special plea No. 4, and the matter was certified to the Supreme Court of Appeals.

Ruling reversed, and demurrer overruled.

Hoff & Moore, T. M. McIntire, and K. C. Moore, all of Parkersburg, for plaintiff.

Ambler, McCluer & Ambler and Robert B. McDougle, all of Parkersburg, for defendant.

RILEY, Judge.

This certificate involves the sufficiency of a special plea, a demurrer thereto having been sustained.

[197 S.E. 11]

Thomas Mains, an infant, 18 years of age, instituted an action of trespass on the case against the J. E. Harris Company, a corporation, for damages sustained while in its employ, alleging in his declaration, for purpose of negativing the application of the Compensation Act, that the defendant, although a subscriber, did not post or keep posted in conspicuous places about its place of business typewritten or printed notices, or otherwise inform or notify the claimant of its election to make payments into the compensation fund, and, further, that the plaintiff did not otherwise have or obtain knowledge or notice of such fact until after the injury, for which he claims damages.

The defendant, for special plea, avers in plea No. 4 (which embodies, and, by agreement, was substituted for, all former special picas), among other things, that between the date of the injury and the institution of the foregoing action, a number of applications, on forms furnished by the compensation department, for payment out of the fund of claims for hospital bills and nurse hire "on account of injuries sustained by me and compensation due me on account", etc., were executed by plaintiff, and that checks were issued therefor; that subsequent to institution of the law action, an application for payment of a doctor's bill was filed and paid, and an application made for compensation, with request, in case of an award, that payments be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • State ex rel. ACF Industries v. Vieweg, No. 25142.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • February 5, 1999
    ...(Main Vol.1914); Deller v. Naymick, 176 W.Va. 108, 110-11, 342 S.E.2d 73, 75-76 (1985); Mains v. J.E. Harris Co., 119 W.Va. 730, 732-33, 197 S.E. 10,11 (1938). As a result of this legislative action, the source of an employee's remedies for a workrelated injury changed from judicial constru......
  • Bell v. Vecellio & Grogan, Inc., No. 22970
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • July 17, 1996
    ...the interest of the public, as well as the employee and employer are to be considered. Mains v. J.E. Harris Co., 119 W.Va. 730, 732-33, 197 S.E. 10, 11 The provision of the Workers' Compensation Act directly implicated in this case is the deliberate intention exception to an employer's immu......
  • Rogers v. State Compensation Com'r, Nos. CC815
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 9, 1954
    ...provided for such injuries. See Weatherford v. Arter, 135 W.Va. 391, 63 S.E.2d 572; Mains v. J. E. Harris Company, 119 W.Va. 730, 197 S.E. 10, 117 A.L.R. 511. As that system is created solely by statute it is necessary, in resolving the question presented by the certificate, to consider and......
  • Johnson v. United States, No. 6098.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • December 16, 1950
    ...Radville, 112 Conn. 459, 153 A. 154; Young v. Sterling Leather Works, 91 N.J.L. 289, 102 A. 395; Mains v. J. E. Harris Co., 119 W.Va. 730, 197 S.E. 10, 117 A.L.R. 511; B. E. Hewett Lumber Co. v. Brumfield, 196 Ky. 723, 245 S.W. 858; Humphries v. Boxley Bros. Co., 146 Va. 91, 135 S.E. 890, 4......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • State ex rel. ACF Industries v. Vieweg, No. 25142.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • February 5, 1999
    ...(Main Vol.1914); Deller v. Naymick, 176 W.Va. 108, 110-11, 342 S.E.2d 73, 75-76 (1985); Mains v. J.E. Harris Co., 119 W.Va. 730, 732-33, 197 S.E. 10,11 (1938). As a result of this legislative action, the source of an employee's remedies for a workrelated injury changed from judicial constru......
  • Bell v. Vecellio & Grogan, Inc., No. 22970
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • July 17, 1996
    ...the interest of the public, as well as the employee and employer are to be considered. Mains v. J.E. Harris Co., 119 W.Va. 730, 732-33, 197 S.E. 10, 11 The provision of the Workers' Compensation Act directly implicated in this case is the deliberate intention exception to an employer's immu......
  • Rogers v. State Compensation Com'r, Nos. CC815
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 9, 1954
    ...provided for such injuries. See Weatherford v. Arter, 135 W.Va. 391, 63 S.E.2d 572; Mains v. J. E. Harris Company, 119 W.Va. 730, 197 S.E. 10, 117 A.L.R. 511. As that system is created solely by statute it is necessary, in resolving the question presented by the certificate, to consider and......
  • Johnson v. United States, No. 6098.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • December 16, 1950
    ...Radville, 112 Conn. 459, 153 A. 154; Young v. Sterling Leather Works, 91 N.J.L. 289, 102 A. 395; Mains v. J. E. Harris Co., 119 W.Va. 730, 197 S.E. 10, 117 A.L.R. 511; B. E. Hewett Lumber Co. v. Brumfield, 196 Ky. 723, 245 S.W. 858; Humphries v. Boxley Bros. Co., 146 Va. 91, 135 S.E. 890, 4......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT