Putnam v. Beechler
Citation | 299 Mich. 552,300 N.W. 880 |
Decision Date | 02 December 1941 |
Docket Number | No. 54.,54. |
Parties | PUTNAM v. BEECHLER et al. |
Court | Supreme Court of Michigan |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Marcus L. Putnam, employee, opposed by Cash R. Beechler, employer, and Michigan Mutual Liability Company, insurance carrier. From an award of the Department of Labor and Industry granting employee compensation for total disability, together with medical and hospital bills, the employer and insurance carrier appeal.
Award vacated.
Appeal from the Department of Labor and Industry.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
L. J. Carey and Geo. J. Cooper, both of Detroit, for appellants.
G. E. McArthur, of Eaton Rapids, for appellee.
This is an appeal by defendants from order and award of the department of labor and industry, entered December 18, 1940, granting plaintiff compensation of $18 per week for total disability, together with medical and hospital bills. Such award reversed an order of the deputy commissioner denying plaintiff compensation on the ground that ‘the proofs show an injury but fail to show the injury to be of accidental origin.’
Plaintiff was employed by defendant Beechler as manager of a movie theatre in Eaton Rapids. His duties included putting up theatre advertising sheets or posters each week. On May 17, 1940, plaintiff went into the C. J. Moore Implement store in Eaton Rapids intending to place a poster in the front window. He had been putting up posters in such store window for over two years. The window extended across the front of the store, with a wooden ledge or casing, four or five inches wide, located 27 inches above the floor. About six feet above the floor another wooden ledge extended across the window, and the top window frame was about two feet above such ledge.
Plaintiff intended to step up on the lower window ledge and tack a poster along the top frame, so that the poster would hang down in the window. He put his left foot on the lower ledge, grasped the second ledge with his left hand and, as he attempted to ‘push and pull’ himself up on the lower ledge, his right leg ‘suddenly gave way’ and he fell down ‘in a heap.’ The tibia bone in his right leg was broken three or four inches below the knee. Plaintiff, the only witness in his behalf, on direct examination testified in part as follows:
* * *
‘
On cross-examination plaintiff testified:
‘
‘
‘
‘
‘
Defendants contend that plaintiff did not sustain an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment, and that his injury resulted from a diseased condition of his leg bone.
Defendants called Dr. Carl S. Davenport, who had X-rayed plaintiff's leg in December, 1938, following his first injury and had also X-rayed plaintiff's leg in August, 1940, following the injury in question. Dr. Davenport testified regarding the fracture of plaintiff's leg in 1938 as follows:
* * *
Dr. Davenport also testified regarding plaintiff's injury, being considered in this case, as follows:
* * *
The department, in its opinion reversing the deputy and awarding compensation to plaintiff, stated in part:
‘We think that under the decisions of the court the occurrence of the accident raises the natural inference that it arose out of the employment. * * *
‘We think to find the weakened bone caused the fall is conjectural.’
The department, in its opinion, and plaintiff's counsel, in his brief, rely upon the cases of Rogers v. Ford Motor Co., 287 Mich. 104, 282 N.W. 918, and De Mann v. Hydraulic Engineering Co., 192 Mich. 594, 159 N.W. 380, in which the employees were found dead, and also the case of Dulyea v. Shaw-Walker Co., 292 Mich. 570, 291 N.W. 10, in which the employee was found unconscious and died without regaining consciousness. In such cases there was no testimony showing the circumstances under which...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Adkins v. Rives Plating Corp.
...496. Inferences, however, may not be drawn which are contrary to the established facts and the undisputed evidence. Putnam v. Beechler, 299 Mich. 552, 561, 300 N.W. 880.' The commission's finding that the first fracture was the proximate cause of the second fracture is not even supported by......
- In re Widening of Mich. Ave. from 14TH Ave. to Vinewood Ave.
-
Pigue v. Gen. Motors Corp.
...compensation cases we review the record to determine if there is competent evidence to support the finding of facts, see Putnam v. Beechler, 299 Mich. 552, 300 N.W. 880. In our opinion there is competent testimony to sustain the finding of fact that plaintiff was totally disabled from doing......
-
Byrne v. Clark Equip. Co.
...the original injury and the appendix removal. The burden was upon plaintiff to establish her claim for compensation. Putnam v. Beechler, 299 Mich. 522, 300 N.W. 880;Dulyea v. Shaw-Walker Co., 292 Mich. 570, 291 N.W. 10. It was incumbent upon her to prove that her decedent's hernia injury wa......