Swalley v. Department of Labor and Industries
| Decision Date | 05 December 1929 |
| Docket Number | 21976. |
| Parties | SWALLEY v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, Thurston County; D. F. Wright, Judge.
Proceeding under the Industrial Insurance Act by Charles E. Swalley claimant, opposed by the Department of Labor and Industries of the State of Washington. From a judgment in favor of claimant, reversing an order of the Department of Labor and Industries, the latter appeals. Affirmed.
John H Dunbar and Harry Ellsworth Foster, both of Olympia, for appellant.
John S Lynch, of Olympia, and H. E. Grimm, of Centralia, for respondent.
This is an appeal taken by the Department of Labor and Industries of Washington from a judgment of the superior court to the effect that one Charles E. Swalley is entitled to claim certain benefits under the industrial insurance act. The facts giving rise to this controversy are, briefly stated, as follows:
Charles E. Swalley and one James L. Vale jointly purchased a tract of timber land, each contributing one-half of the initial payment of $600, it being understood that the balance of the purchase price was to be paid as the timber on the land was cut and sold. The timber was suitable for ties, and it was agreed between Messrs. Swalley and Vale that the former was to conduct the logging operations, and that a small mill owned by the latter was to cut the logs into ties. A broker was to dispose of the product, and, after deducting certain marketing expenses and paying the amount to be applied on the purchase of the timber, should divide the balance of the proceeds equally between Messrs. Swalley and Vale. Swalley out of his share, was to pay all expenses in connection with the logging operations, and Vale, out of his share, was to pay all the operating expenses of the mill. Neither party was to be specifically repaid the sum originally advanced on account of the purchase of the timber.
In the couse of the operations it so happened that the mill crew was short one man, and Vale requested Swalley to lend him one of his logging crew. In compliance with this request Swalley himself went to work in the mill, and while so employed sustained certain injuries, for which he sought compensation under the Industrial Insurance Act. His claim being disallowed by the department, Swalley appealed to the superior court, which reversed the order of the department and entered judgment in Mr. Swalley's favor, from which the department prosecutes this appeal.
Appellant contends that Messrs. Swalley and Vale were partners, and that under section 7675, Rem. Comp. Stat. (), Mr. Swalley, being as a partner with Mr. Vale himself the employer, cannot claim any benefit under the act; no notice having...
To continue reading
Request your trial