State ex rel. Weaver v. Workmen's Comp. Comm.

• Decision Date: 02 July 1936
• Docket Number: No. 34677.,34677.
• Parties: STATE OF MISSOURI at the relation of MARY OLIVIA WEAVER, Relator, v. MISSOURI WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and EDGAR C. NELSON, ORIN H. SHAW and JAY J. JAMES as Members and Commissioners constituting the WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COMMISSION.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

95 S.W.2d 641

STATE OF MISSOURI at the relation of MARY OLIVIA WEAVER, Relator, v. MISSOURI WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and EDGAR C. NELSON, ORIN H. SHAW and JAY J. JAMES as Members and Commissioners constituting the WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COMMISSION.

No. 34677.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

Court en Banc, July 2, 1936.^*

Mandamus.

PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDAMUS ISSUED.

William R. Schneider and Frank E. Atwood for relator.

(1) The alternative writ of mandamus was properly directed to the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission and the members and commissioners constituting the same. Provisions of the practice act, authorizing all persons having an interest in a controversy to be made parties plaintiff or defendant, have no application to proceedings in mandamus. State ex rel. Gordon v. Burkhardt, 59 Mo. 78; State ex rel. Conran v. Williams, 96 Mo. 18, 8 S.W. 771; State ex rel. Baker v. Fraker, 166 Mo. 142, 65 S.W. 720; Hargadine-McKittrick D.G. Co. v. Garesche, 227 S.W. 827. (2) All facts well pleaded by relator are admitted to be true for the purpose of this proceeding, because they are not denied in express terms by respondents. Hence, the sole issue submitted is the construction to be given Section 3310 (b), Revised Statutes 1929. State ex rel. Potter v. Riley, 219 Mo. 690, 118 S.W. 647; State ex rel. Caulfield v. Broaddus, 234 Mo. 332, 137 S.W. 271; State ex rel. Conran v. Williams, 96 Mo. 18, 8 S.W. 771. (3) Peremptory writ of mandamus should be awarded as herein prayed, because Section 3310 (b), Revised Statutes 1929, applies to all injuries received in this State regardless of where the contract of employment was made, and to all injuries received outside of this State by an employee who was employed in this State unless the contract of employment provides otherwise. This construction is well sustained by (a) The language of Section 3310, Revised Statutes 1929. State ex rel. Dean v. Daues, 321 Mo. 1126, 14 S.W. (2d) 1002. (b) Missouri decisions: Bolin v. Swift & Co., 335 Mo. 732, 73 S.W. (2d) 778; Elsas v. Montgomery Elevator Co., 330 Mo. 596, 50 S.W. (2d) 134. (c) Current interpretation by text writers: Schneider's Workmen's Compensation Law (1 Ed.), sec. 47, p. 226 (2 Ed.), sec. 47, p. 413; Conflict of Workmen's Compensation Laws, pp. 220-227, p. 223, note 15, St. Louis Law Review, April, 1935. (d) Resulting equality of treatment to all Missouri employees: Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial Acc. Comm. of Cal., 55 Sup. Ct. 521; Ocean Acc. & Guar. Co. v. Industrial Comm. of Arizona, 257 Pac. 644; Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial Acc. Comm. of Cal., 34 Pac. (2d) 716. (e) Federal and related state decisions: Ohio v. Chattanooga Boiler & Tank Co., 289 U.S. 439, 53 Sup. Ct. 665; Bradford Electric L. & P. Co. v. Clapper, 286 U.S. 158, 52 Sup. Ct. 57; Weiderhoff, Inc., v. Neal, 6 Fed. Supp. 798; Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial Acc. Comm. of Cal., 55 Sup. Ct. 523; Essau v. Smith Bros., Inc., 246 N.W. 230; DeGray v. Miller Bros. Const. Co., 173 Atl. 556; Alaska Packers Assn. v. Industrial Acc. Comm. of Cal., 34 Pac. (2d) 716; St. Louis Law Review, April, 1935, pp. 220-221, 227; Harvard Law Review, p. 620. (f) Decisions in other jurisdictions: Associated Indemnity Corp. v. Landers, 14 Pac. (2d) 950; Interstate Power Co. v. Industrial Comm. of Wis., 234 N.W. 889; Val Blatz Brewing Co. v. Gerard, 230 N.W. 622; Ginsburg v. Byers, 214 N.W. 55.

Roy McKittrick, Attorney General, and Covell R. Hewitt, Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.

The Workmen's Compensation Act of Illinois applies in this case and has jurisdiction to determine compensation to relator for the death of her husband; and to give jurisdiction to the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission would be violative of the "full faith and credit" clause of the United States Constitution. Sec. 3310, R.S. 1929; U.S. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 1; Bradford El. Lt. Co. v. Clapper, 286 U.S. 145, 76 L. Ed. 1026, 52 Sup. Ct. 571, 82 A.L.R. 696; Pederzoli's Case, 169 N.E. 427; McLaughlin's Case, 174 N.E. 338; 71 C.J., p. 304, sec. 46; State ex rel. Brewen-Clark Syrup Co. v. Workmen's Comp. Comm., 8 S.W. (2d) 899; Scott v. White Eagle Oil & Refining Co., 47 Fed. (2d) 616; Hartman v. Union E.L. & P. Co., 53 S.W. (2d) 243; Weiderhoff, Inc., v. Neal, 6 Fed. Supp. 800.

A.A. Alexander, amicus curiae.

(1) The peremptory writ of mandamus should not be awarded as herein prayed, because the contract of employment between Samuel James Weaver and The Norwich Pharmacal Company was entered into within the State of Illinois, and when said Samuel James Weaver was employed by The Norwich Pharmacal Company, and at the time of his death, there was in full force and effect in the State of Illinois, an act of the Legislature of the State of Illinois, known as Chapter 48, of Cahill's Illinois Revised Statutes, 1933, which contained the following provision: "Every person in the service of another under any contract of hire, express or implied, oral or written, including persons whose employment is outside of the State of Illinois where the contract of hire is made within the State of Illinois, and including aliens, and minors who, for the purpose of this Act shall be considered the same and have the same power to contract, receive payments and give quittances therefor as adult employees, but not including any totally blind person or any person who is not engaged in the usual course of the trade, business, profession or occupation of his employer." Workmen's Compensation Act, State of Ill., Chap. 48, Cahill's Illinois R.S. 1933; Beall Bros. Supply Co. v. Industrial Comm., 341 Ill. 193, 173 N.E. 64; Armburg v. Railroad Co., 276 Mass. 418, 177 N.E. 665, 80 A.L.R. 1408, cert. granted 52 Sup. Ct. 44, 284 U.S. 609, 76 L. Ed. 521, and aff. 52 Sup. Ct. 336, 285 U.S. 334, 76 L. Ed. 729; McLaughlin's Case, 274 Mass. 217, 174 N.E. 338; Pederzoli's Case, 269 Mass. 550, 169 N.E. 427; Falvey v. Sprague Meter Co., 111 Conn. 693; Post v. Burger & Gohlke, 216 N.Y. 544. (2) The action of the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission, in assuming jurisdiction of relator's claim for compensation would be violative of the constitutional guarantee of full faith and credit which is required to be given to the public acts of a sister state. U.S. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 1; Bradford Electric Co. v. Clapper, 286 U.S. 145, 76 L. Ed. 1026, 52 Sup. Ct. 571, 82 A.L.R. 699; Broderick, Supt. of Banks of New York, v. Rosner, 294 U.S. 642, 55 Sup. Ct. 592; Weiderhoff v. Neal, 6 Fed. (2d) 798; In re Borgelt, 10 Fed. Sup. 113. (3) The failure to recognize the force and effect of the Workmen's Compensation Act of the State of Illinois would deny also full faith and credit, guaranteed by Section 1, Article IV of the Constitution of the United States, to the judicial proceedings and decisions of the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. U.S. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 1; Beall Bros. Supply Co. v. Industrial Comm., 341 Ill. 193; Kennedy-Vanssum Kraft Co. v. Industrial Comm., 355 Ill. 519; Johnston v. Industrial Comm., 352 Ill. 74; Bradford Electric Co. v. Clapper, supra; Broderick v. Rosner, supra; Weiderhoff v. Neal, supra. (4) The Workmen's Compensation Act of Illinois applied, and applies, automatically and without election on the part of said, The Norwich Pharmacal Company, and applied, and applies, automatically and without election, to the said Samuel James Weaver during his lifetime, and to the relator, Mary Olivia Weaver. Workmen's Compensation Act of Illinois, Chap. 48, Cahill's R.S. 1933; Beall Bros. Supply Co. v. Industrial Comm., supra; O'Brien v. Chicago City Ry. Co., 305 Ill. 244, 137 N.E. 214, 27 A.L.R. 479.

COLLET, J.

Mandamus to compel the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission and the individual members thereof to accept jurisdiction of a claim for compensation under the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Law. The facts are as follows:

On and for some time prior to November 27, 1934, James Weaver was a resident of the State of Missouri, employed by the Norwich Pharmacal Company of Norwich, New York, as a salesman. His employment consisted in calling on customers soliciting orders for drugs. The contract of employment was executed in the State of Illinois. On November 27, 1934, while in the course of his employment Weaver's car accidentally skidded off the road and into a tree in St. Louis County, Missouri, resulting in injuries which caused his death. He left surviving him his widow, also a resident of Missouri, and two minor children. At the time of Weaver's employment and thereafter, there was in full force and effect in the State of Illinois a Workmen's Compensation Law (Chap. 48, Cahill's Ill. R.S. 1933), which provided that the Illinois Compensation Law should apply to any injury received outside the State of Illinois, under contract of employment made within the State of Illinois. [Sec. 205, Chap. 48, Cahill's Ill. R.S. 1933, p. 1379.]

Mary Olivia Weaver, the widow of James Weaver, thereafter applied to the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission for compensation under the Missouri law. The Missouri statute is as follows:

"(a) This chapter shall apply to all cases within its provisions except those exclusively covered by any federal law.

"(b) This chapter shall apply to all injuries received in this state, regardless of where the contract of employment was made, and also to all injuries received outside of this state under contract of employment made in this state, unless the contract of employment in any case shall otherwise provide." [Sec. 3310, R.S. 1929.]

The Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission declined to take jurisdiction of the application upon the grounds that (1) since the contract of employment was made in Illinois, the Missouri statute (subsection (b), supra) does not apply, and (2) that even if the Missouri statute did apply the Missouri Commission should decline jurisdiction because the Illinois law also applies and must, under the full faith and...