Ralph v. Great American Indem. Co.
| Decision Date | 12 November 1943 |
| Docket Number | 30240. |
| Parties | RALPH v. GREAT AMERICAN INDEMNITY CO. et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Curry & Curry, of Augusta, for plaintiff in error.
Cumming Harper & Nixon, of Augusta, and T. Elton Drake, of Atlanta, for defendants in error.
Mrs Henry C. Ralph filed a claim for compensation with the Industrial Board of Georgia (before the name of the board was changed to State Board of Workmen's Compensation), on account of the death of her husband, Henry Clinton Ralph, who was an employee of Castleberry's Food Company at the time of his death. The Great American Indemnity Company was the insurance carrier for the employer. She contended that the death of her husband resulted from injuries arising out of and in the course of his employment. The employer and the insurance carrier denied that his death arose out of and in the course of his employment and this was the sole issue for determination.
The deceased had been employed by Castleberry's Food Company as night watchman at its plant for several years. He lived across the street from the plant in a house owned by the claimant and in the front of which was located a grocery store. The plant was surrounded by a wire fence and illuminated at night by flood lights which were turned on at switches located on three telephone poles located inside the fence. Said employee usually went to the plant about dark which was about 6:30 p. m. at the time of the year the accident occurred, and turned on the lights and would then return home. After eating his supper, he would return to the plant, usually between 9 and 10 p. m., and officially go on duty by punching in at the time clock. He was required to be in the plant six hours each night on duty, but he could stagger the hours any way that suited him. He was paid for the time he worked as represented by the time cards. His home was across the street from the plant; and from his front porch he had a clear view of the main gate and of a portion of the buildings. Everybody around the plant knew he was the night watchman; and when he was at home, he sat on the front porch, and if anyone went to the gate, he would investigate and ascertain their business. He had general supervision of the plant on Sundays and holidays and when people were not there working. He had a key to the gate, and the man who cleaned up the offices on Sunday mornings had to see him to get the key. He customarily punched in at the time clock between 9 and 10 p. m. each night, and would check out several times during the night. He usually checked out between midnight and 1 a. m. to go and get something to eat, and went off duty when he had worked six hours.
The accident which caused his death occurred on Sunday. That afternoon about 6 or 6:30 he crossed the street from his home and turned on the lights at the plant. His supper was usually prepared for him around 8 o'cock, and on the day of the accident, his wife had his supper ready when she heard a noise in the street in front of the house, and upon investigation she found that her husband had been struck and injured by an automobile, which caused his death a few minutes later. The driver of the automobile had not been discovered. It was not shown what the employee did, nor where he was between 6:30, when he turned the lights on at the plant, and 8, when he was struck by the automobile in the street in front of his house, but it was shown by his time card that he had not checked in at the time clock on the night he was injured.
The single director found that the accident which caused the death of the claimant's husband did not arise out of and in the course of his employment and denied compensation, and this was approved by a majority of the full board. On appeal the superior court affirmed the award denying compensation, and the exception here is to that judgment.
The Industrial Board found as a matter of fact, and ruled as a matter of law, that the accident resulting in the death of the claimant's husband did not arise out of and in the course of his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lewis Wood Preserving Co. v. Jones, 40921
...70 Ga.App. 563, 28 S.E.2d 885, the employee had finished all his duties and was free for the night. In Ralph v. Great American Indemnity Co., 70 Ga.App. 115, 27 S.E.2d 756, the employee had the option of going back to work at whatever time he chose as long as he got in the required number o......
-
American Hardware Mut. Ins. Co. v. Burt
...71 Ga.App. 569, 31 S.E.2d 421; Austin v. General Acc. Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 56 Ga.App. 481, 193 S.E. 86; Ralph v. Great American Indem. Co., 70 Ga.App. 115, 27 S.E.2d 756. It is important to observe that all of the above cases were ones where the Workmen's Compensation Board found ag......
-
Hardware Mut. Cas. Co. v. King
... ... 480; Travelers Ins. Co. v. Faulkner, 63 Ga.App. 438, 11 S.E.2d 367; Ralph v. Great American Indem. Co., ... 70 Ga.App. 115, 27 S.E.2d 756; Aetna ... ...
-
Smith v. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
...59 Ga.App. 270(2), 200 S.E. 480; Travelers Insurance Co. v. Faulkner, 63 Ga.App. 438, 11 S.E.2d 367.' Ralph v. Great American Indemnity Co., 70 Ga.App. 115, 117, 27 S.E.2d 756, 757. 2. 'When death has sealed the month of a witness and there being no other witness as to such deceased witness......