Mann v. Bd. of Educ. of Detroit

• Citation: 266 Mich. 271,253 N.W. 294
• Decision Date: 06 March 1934
• Docket Number: No. 110.,110.
• Parties: MANN et al. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF DETROIT.
• Court: Supreme Court of Michigan

266 Mich. 271

253 N.W. 294

MANN et al.

v.BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF DETROIT.

No. 110.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

March 6, 1934.

Appeal from Department of Labor and Industry.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Law by Alice J. Mann and another, claimants, opposed by the Board of Education of the City of Detroit. Award of compensation by the Department of Labor and Industry, and defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before the Entire Bench.

Raymond J. Kelly, Corp. Counsel, and James R. Walsh, Asst. Corp. Counsel, both of Detroit, for appellant.

L. J. Carey, of Detroit, for appellees.

WIEST, Justice.

La Verne B. Mann was principal of the Eastern High School in the city of Detroit. December 8, 1932, while on his way to Ann Arbor, he met with an automobile accident and received fatal injuries. He was traveling in response to an invitation from the registrar of the University of Michigan to visit Ann Arbor on that day and confer with freshmen at the University who had graduated from the school of which he was principal. The scheme of having high school principals visit the University and meet former graduates and ‘check on the records of their graduates, so that if there was any weak spot in the preparation of these students for university work it might be checked on and corrected,’ originated with the University officers and attendance thereat was wholly voluntary. The Detroit board of education is subject to the Workmen's Compensation Law (Comp. Laws 1929, § 8407 et seq., as amended), and dependents of the deceased applied for compensation on the ground that the accident arose out of and in the course of Mr. Mann's employment as principal of defendant's high school. The award was denied by a deputy commissioner but, upon appeal to the full board, an award was made and review by appeal in the nature of certiorari is prosecuted by defendant.

Under our decisions an accident to be compensable must not only arise out of the employment but as well in the course of the employment. Tackles v. Bryant & Detwiler Co., 200 Mich. 350, 167 N. W. 36;Buvia v. Oscar Daniels Co., 203 Mich. 73, 169 N. W. 1009,7 A. L. R. 1301;Glenn v. Reynolds Spring Co., 225 Mich. 693, 196 N. W. 617, 36 A. L. R. 1464;Favorite v. Kalamazoo State Hospital, 238 Mich. 566, 214 N. W. 229;Van Sweden v. Van Sweden, 250 Mich. 238, 230 N. W. 191.

In Stocker v. Southfield Co., 244 Mich. 13, 221 N. W. 175, 176, we made the same holding and marked the line of demarcation between the two terms as follows:

“Out of' points to the cause or source of the accident, while ‘in the course of’ relates to time, place, and circumstances.'

Mr. Mann was under no compulsion to attend the meeting. His superior officer, the superintendent, recognized the benefit to the school system in having him attend, and was willing that he go without leave and on school time, but at his own expense.

One purpose of high school education is to equip graduates for entry to the University and the meeting was in the nature of a survey of...