Meehan v. Apartments

Citation9 N.W.2d 534,305 Mich. 262
Decision Date18 May 1943
Docket NumberNo. 19.,19.
PartiesMEEHAN v. MARION MANOR APARTMENTS et al.
CourtSupreme Court of Michigan

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Carrie Meehan, claimant, for the death of Frederick Meehan, her husband, opposed by Marion Manor Apartments, the Maccabees of Detroit, employer, and Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, insurer. From an award of the Department of Labor and Industry denying compensation, claimant appeals.

Affirmed.Appeal from Department of Labor and Industry-in the Nature of certiorari.

Before the Entire Bench.

Charfoos & Gussin and Ben L. Goode, all of Detroit, for plaintiff and appellant.

Kerr, Lacey & Scroggie, of Detroit, for defendants and appellees.

CHANDLER, Justice.

Plaintiff, dependent widow of Frederick Meehan, deceased, who, at the time of his death, was caretaker of Marion Manor Apartments, owned and operated by The Maccabees of Detroit, a defendant herein, appeals in the nature of certiorari from an award of the department of labor and industry denying her compensation for the accidental death of her husband.

Appellant's brief accepts and quotes the following facts found by the department, all of which are supported by the record:

Plaintiff is the widow and sole dependent of Frederick Meehan, who was found dead on February 14, 1942 in the kitchen of the basement apartment which he occupied in the Marion Manor Apartments. His death was due to asphyxiation from illuminating gas which had escaped from an open burner on a gas stove in the kitchen.

Frederick Meehan was employed by The Maccabees of Detroit as a caretaker in the Marion Manor Apartments. As part of the payment for his services in that capacity, he occupied, rent free, a basement apartment in the Marion Manor Apartments. He also attended a furnace in another apartment building in Royal Oak. At about eight o'clock on the evening of February 13, 1942 he left to attend the furnace in the apartment building in Royal Oak. Apparently nothing further was known of his whereabouts or activities from then until he was seen, about eleven-thirty, in a beer tavern near the Marion Manor Apartments. The proprietor of the tavern testified that plaintiff's decedent was in the tavern for about five minutes and had one glass of beer. Mrs. Clara Bartle, the occupant of the apartment directly above that occupied by the caretaker, testified that she smelled the odor of gas in the hall when she came in about twelve-thirty on the morning of February 14, also that she heard plaintiff's decedent's voice coming from his apartment and continued to hear his voice until she went to sleep at two-thirty. Plaintiff's decedent was found at about seven o'clock in the morning in the kitchen of his apartment, sitting in a chair, fully clothed, his cap on the floor, a clean cup on the table directly to his right and his head on his left arm which was resting on the ledge of a cupboard. A coffee pot stood over one of the burners on the gas stove. The burner was turned on but there was no flame. Gas was escaping from that burner. Whether he had gone to bed early in the morning of February 14 and then arisen to prepare coffee or was preparing the coffee before going to bed is immaterial. Neither is it of any significance that he apparently had not banked the furnace fire as usual because the fire was out and the hot water tank was cold. We find that the cause of his death was accidental and not intentional. We also find, for the reason that he was more or less subject to call, especially to let tenants into the apartment building who had forgotten their keys, and because he had no definite hours of employment, he could while in the Marion Manor Apartments be in the course...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Mack v. Reo Motors, Inc.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • April 2, 1956
    ...v. Chrysler Corporation, 276 Mich. 24, 267 N.W. 589; Furino v. City of Lansing, 293 Mich. 211, 291 N.W. 637; Meehan v. Marion Manor Apartments, 305 Mich. 262, 9 N.W.2d 534; Rector v. Ragnar-benson, Inc., 313 Mich. 277, 21 N.W.2d 129; Luteran v. Ford Motor Co., supra; Haggar v. Tanis, 320 Mi......
  • Dean v. Chrysler Corp.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1990
    ...Inc., 392 Mich. 623, 630, n. 2, 221 N.W.2d 378 (1974), where we questioned the validity of Carner, supra and Meehan v. Marion Manor Apartments, 305 Mich. 262, 9 N.W.2d 534 (1943), in light of Whetro. Both Carner and Meehan relied on Rucker and Appleford.12 See Larson, supra, Sec. 13.13, p. ......
  • Daniel v. Murray Corp. of Am.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • October 10, 1949
    ...Lee and Cady, 294 Mich. 460, 293 N.W. 718;Rucker v. Michigan Smelting & Refining Co., 300 Mich. 668, 2 N.W.2d 808;Meehan v. Marion Manor Apartments, 305 Mich. 262, 9 N.W.2d 534;Rector v. Ragnar-Benson, Inc., 313 Mich. 277, 21 N.W.2d 129;Murphy v. Board of Education of School District of Cit......
  • Phillips v. Fitzhugh Motor Co.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • April 3, 1951
    ...of the School District of the City of Flint, 314 Mich. 226, 22 N.W.2d 280, 282, we quoted with approval from Meehan v. Marion Manor Apartments, 305 Mich. 262, 9 N.W.2d 534, where Justice Chandler, speaking for the court, stated the issue involved in the following language: 'The only questio......
  • 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