Smolenski v. E. Coal Dock Co.
| Decision Date | 18 February 1915 |
| Citation | 87 N.J.L. 26,93 A. 85 |
| Parties | SMOLENSKI v. EASTERN COAL DOCK CO. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Certiorari to Court of Common Pleas, Middlesex County.
Workmen's compensation proceeding by Helen Smolenski against the Eastern Coal Dock Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings certiorari. Affirmed.
This is a workmen's compensation case. The only question is the amount of the compensation. The decedent was paid by the hour. At the time of the injury he was employed as a car rider at 25 cents an hour. At other times he earned 20, 22, and 33 cents an hour. The number of hours he actually worked from June 22, 1913, to the date of the accident, December 11, 1913, was 1139 at 20, 25, and 33 cents and 41 1/2 hours at 22 cents. He actually worked on 128 days.
The trial judge determined that his wages were $15 a week; that is to say, 25 cents an hour for 10 hours a day and 6 days a week.
The defendant claims that his wages were not in excess of $12.40 per week by any proper calculation.
Argued November term, 1914, before SWAYZE, PARKER, and KALISCH, JJ.
Robert J. Bain, of Jersey City (Collins & Corbin, of Jersey City, on the brief), for prosecutor. John A. Coan, of South Amboy, for defendant.
The statute enacts (P. L. 1913, p. 313) that the term "wages" shall be construed to mean the money rate at which the service rendered is recompensed under the contract of hiring in force at the time of the accident; that, where the rate of wages is fixed by the output of the employé, his weekly wages shall be taken to be six times his average daily earnings for a working day of ordinary length, excluding overtime; and that this rate of weekly wages shall be calculated by dividing the total value of the employé's output during the actual number of full working days during the preceding six months by the number of days the workman was actually employed. None of these provisions are precisely applicable to this case. The reference to output naturally points to piecework, and it would be difficult to hold that work by the hour was piece work, since the earnings by the hour are fixed. The earnings by output are not fixed, but depend upon the capacity, success, or good fortune of the worker. The language does, however, indicate that, in a case where weekly wages are not fixed, they shall be taken to be six times the daily wages, and that the daily wages shall be the wages for a working day of ordinary length, excluding overtime. We think it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mahoney v. Nitroform Co.
...has been phrased from time to time. See Schaeffer v. De Grottola, 85 N.J.L. 444, 89 A. 921 (Sup.Ct.1914); Smolenski v. Eastern Coal Dock Co., 87 N.J.L. 26, 93 A. 85 (Sup.Ct.1915), affirmed 88 N.J.L. 387, 95 A. 1079 (E. & A.1915); Jordan v. Lindeman & Co., Inc., 42 A.2d 781, 23 N.J.Misc. 194......
-
Triano v. Carbon Steel Products Corp.
...v. Real Estate Management, Inc., 21 N.J.Super. 357, 91 A.2d 268 (App.Div.1952). Reliance was also placed on Smolenski v. Eastern Coal Dock Co., 87 N.J.L. 26, 93 A. 85 (Sup.Ct.1915), aff'd o.b. 88 N.J.L. 387, 95 A. 1079 (E. & A. 1915). We again granted certification. 62 N.J. 197, 299 A.2d 73......
-
Engelbretson v. American Stores
...giving recognition to this policy concept: Schaeffer v. De Grottola, 85 N.J.L. 444, 89 A. 921 (Sup.Ct.1914); Smolenski v. Eastern Coal Dock Co., 87 N.J.L. 26, 93 A. 85 (Sup.Ct.1915), affirmed 88 N.J.L. 387, 95 A. 1079 (E. & A.1915); Jordan v. Lindeman & Co., Inc., 23 N.J.Misc. 194, 42 A.2d ......
-
Engelbretson v. American Stores
...has been phrased from time to time. See Schaeffer v. De Grottola, 85 N.J.L. 444, 89 A. 921 (Sup.Ct.1914); Smolenski v. Eastern Coal Dock Co., 87 N.J.L. 26, 93 A. 85 (Sup.Ct.1915), affirmed 88 N.J.L. 387, 95 A. 1079 (E. & A.1915); Jordan v. Lindeman & Co., Inc., 23 N.J.Misc. 194, 42 A.2d 781......