U.S. Steel Corp. v. Brown, 20635

Decision Date19 December 1967
Docket NumberNo. 20635,No. 2,20635,2
Citation231 N.E.2d 839,142 Ind.App. 18,12 Ind.Dec. 263
PartiesUNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Aldean T. BROWN, Appellee
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

Hackbert, Rooks, Pitts Fullagar & Poust, Chicago, Ill., White, Raub, Reis & Wick, Indianapolis, Douglas F. Stevenson, Chicago, Ill., and Carl T. Reis, Indianapolis, of counsel, for appellant.

George Krstovich, Gary, for appellee.

SMITH, Judge.

This case involves an appeal by the employer, defendant-appellant, from a decision of The Industrial Board of Indiana awarding compensation to the plaintiff-appellee.

The facts, as found in the record, are as follows:

Appellant, U.S. Steel Corporation, owns and operates a large steel plant lying along Lake Michigan and to the north of the corporate City of Gary. The Calumet River and First Avenue, an east-west street connecting Broadway and Virginia Street, are situated on said U.S. Steel property and north of the corporate City of Gary. The production facilities of U.S. Steel are north of the Calumet River which lies between said First Avenue and U.S. Steel production facilities. North and south streets providing entrance to the U.S. Steel plant are Broadway, Gary's 'main' street, and Virginia Street, which is located six blocks east of Broadway. First Avenue connects Broadway and Virginia Street on said U.S. Steel property. There are massive steel gates south of the intersections of Broadway and Virginia Street with said First Avenue.

Public transportation buses bring U.S. Steel employees to both the Broadway and Virginia Street gates. Along the south side of First Avenue are U.S. Steel parking lots for employees who drive automobiles to work. South of the intersection of Broadway and said First Avenue is a building housing the dispensary and accounting departments of U.S. Steel. First Avenue is a private street or roadway maintained and controlled by the U.S. Steel Corporation and is a street and roadway in general use by the employees of U.S. Steel Corporation as a way over the employer's premises to and from the employees' place of work and said First Avenue was the customary way for employees to go to and from work.

First Avenue has never been dedicated to the City of Gary and is not a public street or highway, but rather a privately owned and maintained roadway. First Avenue is owned and maintained by U.S. Steet Corporation and its personnel control the traffic and investigations of accidents on said street. The traffic control signs on said First Avenue are all erected and maintained by U.S. Steel Corporation and arrests for traffic violations on said street are made by the plant protection personnel.

On August 15, 1962, plaintiff had left her place of work, been to her locker, turned in her time card, and checked out at the Virginia Street gate. She then proceeded south, across Calumet River to First Avenue. She proceeded along the sidewalk on First Avenue westerly to Broadway, when a friend in an automobile--also proceeding westerly--called to her and asked if she wanted a ride. Without looking she stepped off the sidewalk into the street, and into the path of a car proceeding easterly on First Avenue.

A Plant Protection Officer of U.S. Steel was quickly on the scene, took her to the United States Steel Dispensary for first aid, and notified the Gary Police Department of the accident. At the United States Steel Dispensary, first aid, including an x-ray, was administered, and she was referred to her family doctor. The Gary Police never arrived.

Plaintiff filed an application with the Industrial Board alleging that she suffered an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of her employment. The employer, defendant-appellant, denied that the accident is compensable.

The claim was heard by one of the members of the Board, Mr. McNevin, on March 9, 1966. He entered a decision as follows:

'* * * that plaintiff did not sustain an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of her employment with the defendant, and that any impairment plaintiff may have is wholly unrelated to her employment with the defendant.'

Plaintiff appealed to the Full Board, which, after argument, remanded the cause to the single hearing member,

'* * * for the purpose of hearing additional evidence to determine ownership as well as the maintenance and supervision of the roadway upon which the plaintiff allegedly sustained her accidental injury; that all evidence adduced at said hearing shall be submitted to the Full Industrial Board for further proceedings.'

Further...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Chestnut v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • October 22, 1969
    ...Ind.App. 499, 209 N.E.2d 32 (1965); Marshall v. Tribune-Star Publishing Co., Ind.App., 236 N.E.2d 508 (1968); United States Steel Corp. v. Brown, Ind.App., 231 N.E.2d 839 (1968).1 Fields v. State, 134 Ind. 46, 53, 32 N.E. 780, 782 (1892), in which the court used the quoted language to conde......
  • Donahue v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • March 8, 1985
    ...arose out of and in the course of his employment." Reed, 129 Ind.App. at 90, 152 N.E.2d at 263. See also United States Steel Corporation v. Brown, (1967) 142 Ind.App. 18, 231 N.E.2d 839, trans. denied (1968) [award to employee injured on street owned and controlled by employer shortly after......
  • Prater v. Indiana Briquetting Corp.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • October 30, 1969
    ...many which we must consider in determining if a causal relation between the accident and employment exists.' United States Steel Corp. v. Brown (1967), Ind.App., 231 N.E.2d 839, 841. (our emphasis) The crux of the issue then is whether or not there is a causal relation between the accident ......
  • Donahue v. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • December 1, 1983
    ...owner is an important determinant of this connection and accordingly of what duty the employer owes under the Act. U.S. Steel Corp. v. Brown (1967), 142 Ind.App. 18, 231 N.E.2d 839 (transfer When, as here, there is a concentration of industrial machinery attended by a large number of employ......
  • 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