Rockwood Alabama Stone Co. v. Lawler

• Decision Date: 27 June 1931
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 314.
• Citation: 135 So. 569,223 Ala. 336
• Parties: ROCKWOOD ALABAMA STONE CO. v. LAWLER.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

135 So. 569

223 Ala. 336

ROCKWOOD ALABAMA STONE CO. v. LAWLER.

8 Div. 314.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 27, 1931

Appeal from Law and Equity Court, Franklin County; B. H. Sargent Judge.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Dick Lawler against the Rockwood Alabama Stone Company to recover compensation on account of injury.Judgment awarding compensation, and the employer brings certiorari.Transferred from Court of Appeals.

Affirmed.

J. Foy Guin, of Russellville, for appellant.

H. H Hamilton, of Russellville, for appellee.

BOULDIN J.

The defenses set up to the claim of the workman for compensation were: First, a denial that the injury arose out of and in course of the employment; second, willful violation of a known and reasonable rule of the employer relating to the service.

The finding of fact was quite general, a mere conclusion, saying "While acting within the discharge of his duties as such employee of the defendant, and while acting within the line and scope of the employment," the injury was received.

In such case a bill of exceptions is permissible.The office of same is not that this court shall pass upon the weight of the evidence, but to determine as matter of law whether there is any evidence directly sustaining such finding, or of facts and circumstances from which such conclusion may reasonably be drawn.Greek's Case, 207 Ala. 219, 92 So. 458.

Looking to the bill of exceptions, it appears plaintiff's employment was to operate a "joining saw," cutting stone which had been made ready by planing, etc.

The injury, loss of a thumb, was received while operating a cut-off saw in cutting kindling to make a fire in the "oven" or "salamander" provided by the employer for the comfort of employees at work.This cut-off saw was located outside the shed where plaintiff worked, and he was operating same some 15 minutes before regular working hours.

Evidence for plaintiff tended to show employees were expected to make their own fires, if wanted, to get kindling to start coke fires from waste lumber outside the stove cutter's shed that, with the knowledge and acquiescence of the foreman in charge, plaintiff had used the cut-off saw for this purpose, and that he and other employees used it to cut wood blocks or wedges needed in their work when none were prepared by regular carpenters.

Further evidence tended to show plaintiff and other employees were accustomed, with the knowledge and acquiescence of the employer, to go to the plant before the regular hours of work and...