Prayther v. Deepwater Coal & Iron Co.

• Decision Date: 20 October 1927
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 969
• Citation: 216 Ala. 579,114 So. 194
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court
• Parties: PRAYTHER v. DEEPWATER COAL & IRON CO.

114 So. 194

216 Ala. 579

PRAYTHER v. DEEPWATER COAL & IRON CO.

6 Div. 969

Supreme Court of Alabama

October 20, 1927

Petition of Lee Prayther for certiorari to the circuit court of Walker county to review the finding and judgment of that court in a proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by petitioner against the Deepwater Coal & Iron Company. Writ denied; judgment affirmed.

Sowell & Gunn, of Jasper, for appellant.

Arthur Fite, of Jasper, for appellee.

GARDNER J.

Certiorari proceeding to review the judgment of the circuit court denying to appellant compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Law. Section 7534 et seq., Code of 1923.

The sole question presented is whether the injury arose out of and in the course of the employment. The solution of questions of this character must depend upon the particular facts and circumstances. "No exact formula can be laid down which will automatically solve every case." Benoit Coal Min. Co. v. Moore, 215 Ala. 222, 109 So 879.

Our statute contains some restrictive features which have been frequently considered by this court. Section 7596, Code of 1923, subd. (j); Jett v. Turner, 215 Ala. 352, 110 So. 702; Ex parte Am. Fuel Co., 210 Ala. 229, 97 So. 711; Ex parte Taylor, 213 Ala. 282, 104 So. 527. The provisions of subdivision (j) have been discussed in the above-cited authorities and need no repetition here, but for convenience the same is here quoted:

"Personal Injuries, etc.--Without otherwise affecting either the meaning or interpretation of the abridged clause injuries by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, it is hereby declared: Not to cover workmen except while engaged in, on, or about the premises where their services are being performed, or where their service requires their presence as a part of such service at the time of the accident, and during the hours of service as such workmen. *** "

The facts of the instant case here pertinent are as follows Prayther (petitioner) had a contract with the Deepwater Coal & Iron Corporation for cutting and hauling timber to its mines for which he was paid so much per stack, and other hauling for which he was paid by the load or "shift." He owned his own mules and wagon and lived at his own home, one-fourth of a mile from the mines. On the day of the injury he had only hauled one load to the mines, had quit work, and gone to his home. He left the mines just before the miners quit work, which is the hour of 3:30 in the afternoon during the summer season. Prayther, upon reaching home, carried the mules for water to the branch, and brought them back to his stable to be fed. Three of them had been fed, and he then went to the stable to feed the fourth mule. This was between 4 and 5 o'clock in the afternoon, and as he went to the fourth mule (which had not been worked on that day) he received a serious, permanent injury from a kick by this mule. The details are here unnecessary to relate. It is to be noted that Prayther furnished the mules, wagon, and labor, kept his teams, and attended thereto himself at his own home, and at the time of the injury had completed his work for the day, and merely engaged in feeding his mules. So far as this record indicates, the defendant had no interest in the mules or any connection with their care.

A case more directly in point is that of State ex rel. Jacobson v. District Court, 144 Minn. 259, 175 N.W. 110, where the workman, as here, furnished his team and labor at an agreed compensation and cared for his team at his own expense. The day's work was done, the horses fed, and after supper he went to the stable to doctor one of the horses and was killed by one of them....