Southern Const. Co. v. State Indus. Com'n

• Decision Date: 30 October 1925
• Docket Number: 15974.
• Parties: SOUTHERN CONST. CO. et al. v. STATE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

240 P. 613

112 Okla. 248, 1925 OK 851

SOUTHERN CONST. CO. et al. v. STATE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.

No. 15974.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

October 30, 1925

Syllabus by the Court.

An "independent contractor" is one who engages to perform a certain service for another, according to his own manner and method, free from control and direction of his employer in all matters connected with the performance of the service, except as to the result or product of the work.

Record examined; held, to be insufficient to support award in favor of L. F. Steward.

Commissioners' Opinion, Division No. 4.

Original proceeding commenced in the Supreme Court by the Southern Construction Company and the Southern Surety Company against the State Industrial Commission and L. F. Steward, to review an award made in favor of Steward for injuries alleged to have been suffered during the course of employment. Reversed and remanded.

Burford Miley, Hoffman & Burford, of Oklahoma City, and A. J Follens, of Tulsa, for petitioners.

George S. Short, Atty. Gen., and Baxter Taylor, Asst. Atty. Gen for respondents.

STEPHENSON C.

L. F Steward filed his claim for injuries alleged to have been suffered by claimant in the course of his employment with the Southern Construction Company. A trial of the cause resulted in judgment for the claimant allowing compensation for the injury. The Southern Construction Company and the Southern Surety Company commenced their proceeding in this court within the time provided by statute for a review of the award. Petitioners submit the proposition that the evidence fails to show that Steward was in the employment of the Southern Construction Company within the terms of the Workmen's Compensation Act, at the time he received the injury; that the relation between the Southern Construction Company, and the claimant was that of employer and independent contractor at the time he received the injury complained about. The facts pertaining to the injury are not disputed, and the record presents only a question of law for consideration. The evidence is that the Southern Construction Company employed the claimant to deliver gravel on a road construction job for 20 cents per ton per mile as his compensation. It appears that the claimant owned a truck, and was at liberty to drive the truck or employ any one under his control and direction to perform the same service in delivering the gravel. The construction company was not obligated to exercise any control over the claimant or his driver in the method and manner employed in the performance of the service. The construction company owed no duty to inspect the truck and maintain the same in proper repairs. The employer was concerned only with the delivery of the gravel on the construction job at the place it designated. The testimony of the claimant before the Industrial Commission does not show how the injury occurred. A physician's report shows that the injury resulted from a fracture of the lower end of left radius, and of scaphoid bone, and dislocation of the wrist. The accident occurred on Tuesday July 29th, and, according to the claimant's testimony, he continued to drive the truck and did not discover that his arm was broken until Saturday. Neither the statements filed with the Commission nor the claimant's evidence shows that...