Smith v. Cudahy Packing Company

Decision Date05 April 1924
Docket Number25,444
Citation115 Kan. 874,225 P. 110
PartiesDAISY SMITH, Appellee, v. CUDAHY PACKING COMPANY, Appellant
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Decided January, 1924.

Appeal from Wyandotte district court, division No. 3; WILLIAM H MCCAMISH, judge.

Judgment affirmed.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT -- Compensation Allowable for Injury to Thumb and First Finger Greater Than Loss of Thumb and Finger--One Who Elects to Accept Terms of Law Bound by Its Terms. If the provisions of the workmen's compensation act as interpreted by this court, under which a larger amount is sometimes allowed for an injury to a limb or other member than for its loss, would otherwise make it violative of the fourteenth amendment to the federal constitution, that result is prevented by the fact that the statute binds only those who have voluntarily elected to accept its terms.

J. E. McFadden, and O. Q. Claflin, jr., both of Kansas City, for the appellant.

J. K. Cubbison, and William G. Holt, both of Kansas City, for the appellee.

OPINION

MASON, J.:

Daisy Smith recovered from the Cudahy Packing Company a judgment for $ 2,490, in addition to an allowance for medical attendance, under the workmen's compensation law. Her injury consisted of the cutting of her thumb and first finger in such a way as to render them permanently stiff. There was evidence also that the use of her hand was impaired. The amount of her recovery was based upon the minimum allowance of $ 6 a week for 414 weeks for a permanent partial disability. (R. S. 44-510, paragraph 3, clause c.) The company appeals, contending that the amount of compensation should have been controlled by items (1) and (2) as qualified by (22) of the schedule of allowances for specific injuries in the section just cited, amounting to $ 360 for the loss of the use of her thumb and $ 222 for the loss of the use of her finger. The portions of the statute referred to read:

"Where disability, partial in character but permanent in quality, results from the injury, the injured workman shall be entitled to the compensation provided in paragraph 1 of this section, but shall not be entitled to any other or further compensation for or during the first week following the injury. Thereafter, compensation in a lump sum shall be paid as provided in the following schedule, the average weekly wages to be computed as provided in section 4 of this act, and the compensation to be in no case less than $ 6 per week nor more than $ 12 per week.

"(1) For the loss of a thumb, 50 per cent of the average weekly wages during 60 weeks.

"(2) For the loss of a first finger, commonly called the index finger, 50 per cent of the average weekly wages during 37 weeks.

"(22) Permanent loss of the use of a hand, arm, foot, leg or eye, as a direct result of an injury, shall be considered as the equivalent of the loss of such hand, arm, foot, leg or eye."

It is conceded that to sustain the company's contention would involve the overruling of several recent cases. (Close v. Mining Co., 105 Kan. 257, 182 P. 392; Stefan v Elevator Co., 106 Kan. 369, 187 P. 861; Emry v. Cripes, 110 Kan. 693, 205 P. 598; Anderson v. Oil & Refining Co., 111 Kan. 314, 206 P. 900.) The matter having been so recently and so repeatedly passed upon, no further discussion is regarded as necessary. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Mitchell v. J.A. Tobin Constr. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1942
    ...186 Pac. 127; Wegel v. Ismirt-Hincke Milling Co., 105 Kan. 615, 186 Pac. 130. The statute is optional in character. [Smith v. Packing Co., 115 Kan. 874, 223 Pac. 110.] The substance of holdings in these cases is that both employer and employee, by operation of the statutes mentioned accept ......
  • Miller v. Johnson
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • October 5, 2012
    ...P. 249, for proposition workers compensation act subject to no constitutional infirmity because not compulsory); Smith v. Packing Co., 115 Kan. 874, 875, 225 P. 110 (1924) (citing Shade, 93 Kan. at 260, 144 P. 249; “[Q]uestions as to whether various features of a workmen's compensation act ......
  • Hilburn v. Enerpipe Ltd.
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • June 14, 2019
    ...P. 249, for proposition Workers Compensation Act subject to no constitutional infirmity because not compulsory); Smith v. Packing Co., 115 Kan. 874, 875, 225 P. 110 (1924) ("[Q]uestions as to whether various features of a workman's compensation act were violative of the fourteenth amendment......
  • Mitchell v. J. A. Tobin Const. Co.
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1942
    ...608, 186 P. 127; Wegele v. Ismert-Hincke Milling Co., 105 Kan. 615, 186 P. 130. The statute is optional in character. [Smith v. Packing Co., 115 Kan. 874, 225 P. 110.] The substance of holdings in these cases is that both employer and employee, by operation of the statutes mentioned accept ......
  • 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