Voight v. McEwan Bros.

• Decision Date: 22 July 1935
• Docket Number: No. 218.,218.
• Parties: VOIGHT v. McEWAN BROS.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

179 A. 850

VOIGHT

v. McEWAN BROS.

No. 218.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

July 22, 1935.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by John K. P. Voight, claimant, opposed by McEwan Bros., employer. From an order of the Workmen's Compensation Bureau granting an award, employer appealed to court of common pleas, and from judgment affirming award, employer brings certiorari.

Writ of certiorari dismissed.

Argued May term, 1935, before PARKER, CASE, and BODINE, JJ.

Herman M. Cone, of Morristown, for petitioner.

Clarence B. Tippett, of New York City, for prosecutor.

PER CURIAM.

Voight, an employee of McEwan Bros., filed a petition for compensation upon a claim of accidental injury alleged to have been suffered by him from an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. A finding in Voight's favor was made in the Workmen's Compensation Bureau, and upon appeal a judgment to like effect was entered in the Morris common pleas. The writ brings up the judgment in the pleas.

Voight was employed as electrician's helper, and his case is that on Sunday, December 15, 1929, as he was working upon some electric wires, he received a shock of electricity and as a result of that shock developed hematomyelia and suffered in consequence an atrophy or wasting away of the muscles of his hands and arms.

The points presented on the employer's brief are, first, that the petitioner did not meet with the accident of which he complains; second, that statutory notice of injury was not given to the employer; and, third, that the hematomyelia did not result from the alleged electric shock. These questions constitute factual disputes upon which there is evidence pro and con and which have been resolved by both the Workmen's Compensation Bureau and the court of common pleas against the employer. When two independent and distinct tribunals have examined the facts and reached a like result, a conclusion so formed should not be lightly disturbed by this court. Mountain Ice Co. v. Durkin, 144 A. 6, 6 N. J. Misc. 1111, affirmed 105 N. J. Law, 636, 147 A. 451. There is evidence to sustain the findings below.

The writ of certiorari will be dismissed, with costs.