Salomon v. State

• Decision Date: 29 May 1968
• Docket Number: No. 239,239
• Parties: Eva SALMON v. STATE of Maryland, Springfield State Hospital et al.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

Page 150

250 Md. 150

242 A.2d 126

Eva SALMON v. STATE of Maryland, Springfield State Hospital et al.

No. 239.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

May 29, 1968.

Harold Buchman, Baltimore (Morton Guth, Baltimore, on the brief), for appellant.

Charles R. Goldsborough, Jr., Sp. Atty. (Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen. and J. Howard Holzer, Sp. Atty., Baltimore, on the brief), for appellees.

Before HAMMOND, C. J., and MARBURY, BARNES, McWILLIAMS and FINAN, JJ.

MARBURY, Judge.

This case involves a claim for workmen's compensation for injuries sustained by the appellant, Eva Salomon, as a result of an accident which occurred on December 7, 1963, at the intersection of maryland Route No. 32 and an access road of Springfield State Hospital. The appellant filed her claim with the Workmen's Compensation Commission and a hearing was held in Westminster on September 15, 1965, resulting in the issuance of an order dated October 27, 1965, disallowing the claim. From this order of the Commission Mrs. Salomon appealed to the Circuit Court for Carroll County where Judge Weant, sitting without a jury, affirmed the order of the Commission saying that 'the injury complained of did not arise out of and in the course of the Claimant's employment.'

The facts surrounding the happening of the accident are not in dispute and are as follows. The claimant, Mrs. Salomon, was superintendent of the social services department of the Springfield State Hospital, where she had charge of approximately thirty employees. Her job required her to go on field trips outside the hospital grounds and on these trips she might use a State car or her own car, and in the latter case she was compensated at the rate of ten cents per mile. Her transportation to and from work was not furnished nor paid for by her employer.

The section of Route 32 where the accident occurred had been under construction for a considerable period prior to the time the accident occurred. This particular section was part of a by-pass around the town of Sykesville and runs through the grounds of Springfield State Hospital. It crosses the access road of the hospital between the south gate and that part of the hospital complex where the appellant's office is situated. Mrs. Salomon had crossed the new highway almost daily since the construction had been in progress and testified that she had occasionally been stopped by flagmen so that construction equipment could proceed, but that the access road had never been closed to hospital traffic and hospital employees had never been instructed to use another entrance.

The records of the State Roads Commission, admitted into evidence, revealed that the by-pass was opened to traffic at 3:30 p. m. on Thursday, December 5, 1963. There was no public announcement of the road opening but prior to this time all traffic control signals, including stop signs, had been put in place at the intersection.

On December 6, 1963, Mrs. Salomon drove to work as usual from her home in Sykesville, about two miles distant from the hospital. At about noon she left the hospital and went to Baltimore where she took a train to Philadelphia to attend a conference as part of her employment. She returned to Baltimore late that evening and drove from the station, where she had parked her car, to her home, arriving at about 9:00 or 10:00 p. m. On the following morning, Saturday, December 7, Mrs. Salomon left her home to go to the hospital where she had an appointment with some students. She entered by the south gate, as was her custom, and started to cross the new portion of Maryland Route 32. At about the center of the intersection of the hospital access road and Route 32 she was struck by an automobile traveling along the newly opened highway. There was no evidence that the other driver was in any way negligent in the operation of his vehicle. Mrs. Salomon stated that she did not know that the new highway had been opened.

Code (1957), Article 101, Section 15 (the Act) provides in pertinent part:

'Every employer subject to the provisions of this article, shall pay or provide * * * compensation * * * for the disability or death of his employee resulting from an accidental personal injury sustained by the employee arising out of and in the course of his employment * * *.'

The appellant first urges that since she had not returned to the hospital from her trip to Philadelphia she was covered under the Act and also claims that she was covered since she received mileage for the use of her car in driving the two miles between her home and the hospital. The fact is, however, that the claimant had not simply deviated from her journey by going home but had terminated the trip. According to the testimony the claimant...