Oldham v. Scofield & Welch
| Decision Date | 27 November 1936 |
| Docket Number | 43342. |
| Citation | 269 N.W. 925,222 Iowa 764 |
| Parties | OLDHAM v. SCOFIELD & WELCH et al. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Floyd County; J. J. Clark, Judge.
Supplemental opinion.
For original opinion, see 266 N.W. 480.
Carl F. Jordan, of Cedar Rapids, and Charles W. M. Randall, of Waterloo, for appellants.
R. W Zastrow, and W. G. Henke, both of Charles City, for appellee.
In the original opinion filed herein one point was overlooked.
On December 10, 1932, a workmen's compensation memoranda of agreement was signed by the employer and the employee, and approved on January 27, 1933, settling the compensation to that date on the basis of $14.40 per week in the total sum of $67.20, which amount was then paid by the employer to the employee; hence the claim of the employee was settled to that date. Under the reopening proceedings the commissioner determined and held that the claimant is 25 per cent permanently disabled as the result of the injury sustained by him October 8, 1932, for disability up to December 10, 1932. The commissioner then ordered the employer to pay the claimant 95 1/3 weeks of compensation at $14.40 per week starting December 10, 1932.
The evidence being in dispute, and there being sufficient evidence to warrant the commissioner in making the allowance of additional compensation, we are bound under our previous holdings to accept the findings of the commissioner that the employee was entitled to additional compensation from December 10, 1932. Having found that the employee had suffered 25 per cent. permanent disability, the question is Was the commissioner warranted in fixing the compensation at $14.40 per week for 95 1/3 weeks?
Under section 1397 of the Code, compensation is to be computed on the basis of the annual earnings which the injured person received as salary, wages, or earnings in the employment of the same employer during the year next preceding the injury. The record is a little hazy on this proposition, but we take it that for the previous year the claimant had received $25 a week up to September, and $18 a week after that. This makes an average weekly wage for that year of $22.66. Code, § 1390, provides that: " Such compensation shall be upon the basis of sixty per cent per week of the average weekly earnings but not to exceed fifteen dollars."
Under these rules 60 per cent. of the average weekly wage could in no event be more...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scheel v. Superior Mfg. Co.
...756; Stice v. Consolidated Indiana Coal Co., 228 Iowa 1031, 291 N.W. 452, and Oldham v. Scofield & Welch, 222 Iowa 764, 266 N.W. 480, 269 N.W. 925. II. The issue of jurisdiction presented in Travelers Insurance Co. v. Sneddon, 249 Iowa ----, 86 N.W.2d 870, is not involved here. That is quit......
-
Bousfield v. Sisters of Mercy
...effect is 71 C.J., Workmen's Compensation Acts, section 1401. Also in Oldham v. Scofield & Welch, 222 Iowa 764, 767, 266 N.W. 480, 481, 269 N.W. 925, we held: 'Where an employee suffers a compensable injury and thereafter returns to work and, as a result thereof, his first injury is aggrava......
-
Dailey v. Pooley Lumber Co.
...disability-reduction of earning capacity, and not mere functional disability. Oldham v. Scofield & Welch, 222 Iowa 764, 768, 266 N.W. 480, 269 N.W. 925; Diederich Tri-City Railway Co., 219 Iowa 587, 258 N.W. 899; Moses v. National Union Coal Mining Co., supra. But functional disability may ......