Simpson v. New Madrid Stave Co.

Decision Date22 August 1932
Docket NumberNo. 5100.,5100.
PartiesMRS. LENORI SIMPSON, RESPONDENT, v. NEW MADRID STAVE COMPANY AND AMERICAN EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from the Circuit Court of New Madrid County. Hon. John E. Duncan, Judge.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED AND REMANDED (with directions in part).

Sharp & Baynes for appellants.

Ward & Reeves for respondent.

COX, P.J.

This is an action for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

The defendant, New Madrid Stave Company, was a manufacturer of barrel staves. Its plant was at New Madrid in Missouri. It employed one George Simpson as an independent contractor to cut a large amount of timber on land on the other side of the Mississippi River in the State of Kentucky. Mr. Simpson employed and paid his own workmen and received his compensation from the stave company at an agreed price per thousand feet of timber cut. The Commissioners found, and we think properly, that Simpson was an independent contractor. While on the ground overseeing and directing the cutting of the timber, a large limb of a tree fell on him and so badly injured him that he died in a short time thereafter. A claim for compensation was filed by this plaintiff, who is his widow. Upon a hearing before a referee, the referee found for plaintiff and made an award of $40 for medical aid; $190 for funeral expenses; $12.21 per week for 299 weeks and $13.21 for one week. From this award of the referee, an appeal was taken to the full commission for review. The commission on review found against the claimant and in favor of defendants upon the ground that the deceased, George Simpson, was an independent contractor and for that reason was not an employee of the Stave Company within the Workmen's Compensation Act and no compensation could be allowed the widow. The claimant then appealed to the circuit court of New Madrid county where, upon a hearing, the court held that on the facts found Simpson was an employee of the Stave Company within the meaning of the law and entered judgment reversing the holding of the commission in which compensation was denied and then entered up judgment for the claimant for the same items and in the same amounts found by the referee. Defendants appealed to this court.

The commission found, and we think the evidence supports that finding, that the deceased, George Simpson, was an independent contractor. The commission then held, as a matter of law, that he was not an employee of the New Madrid Stave Company within the meaning of the statute and denied relief for that reason.

The first question we are required to determine is whether the law extends its benefits to an independent contractor who is employed as Mr. Simpson was employed in this case. The Stave Company was engaged in the manufacture of barrel staves. As a necessary part of this business it must and did procure timber to be cut and delivered to its mills to be manufactured into staves. In this case, it owned a lot of timber on land on the other side of the river and it employed Mr. Simpson as an independent contractor to cut this timber and prepare it for transportation to defendant's plant. The defendant then did the transporting. The statute, section 3308, Revised Statutes 1929, provides:

"(a) Any person who has work done under contract on or about his premises which is an operation of the usual business which he there carries on shall be deemed an employer and shall be liable under this chapter to such contractor, his subcontractors and their employees when injured or killed on or about the premises of the employer while doing work which is in the usual course of his business."

In our view of this case, plaintiff's husband was clearly within the plain terms of this statute. The usual business of the stave company as it was being conducted, consisted of cutting and transporting timber to the company's plant and there manufacturing the timber into staves. Part of the work necessary to be done was to cut timber. The next step was to transport it to the plant and the final step was to cut or saw it into staves. Cutting timber was as much a part of the usual business of the stave company as transporting it or cutting it into staves after it was delivered at the plant. In this case Simpson did the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Rutherford v. Tobin Quarries
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 7 Mayo 1935
    ... ... 630; ... Coylton Coal Co. v. Davidson, 7 F. 727; Whitten ... v. Bell, 1 F. 942; Simpson v. New Madrid Stave ... Co., 52 S.W.2d 615. (3) The commission's finding ... that Rutherford was ... ...
  • Bullock v. Potashnick
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 14 Mayo 1942
    ... ... Crabtree v. Ramsey, 115 S.W.2d 14; Cates v ... Williamson et al., 117 S.W.2d 655; Simpson v. New ... Madrid Stave Co., 52 S.W.2d 615; Pruitt v ... Harker, 43 S.W.2d 769; Cobb v. Standard ... ...
  • Wilson v. Altruk Freight Systems, Inc., No. 17509
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 12 Diciembre 1991
    ...employer's place of business. In keeping with the liberal construction of the term "premises," we held in Simpson v. New Madrid Stave Co., 227 Mo.App. 331, 52 S.W.2d 615, 616 (1932), that the "premises" of the statutory employer is any place where, in the usual operation of his business, it......
  • Jeffreys-mcelrath Mfg. Co v. Huiet, 14606.
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 12 Octubre 1943
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT