Cunningham Construction Co. v. Morgan

Indiana Court of Appeals

Cunningham Construction Co. v. Morgan

156 N.E. 524, 86 Ind. App. 387, 1927 Ind. App. LEXIS 121

Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided May 20, 1927·No. No. 12,921.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Remy, J. —

Appellee, having received an injury while in the employment of appellant, filed with the Industrial Board his application for compensation. Contending that appellee was not entitled to compensation because of wilful misconduct, within §8 of the Compensation Act (Acts 1919 p. 158, §9453 Burns 192b), appellant presented the issue by a special answer. No other issue being presented, a hearing resulted in an award for appellee, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

The question was one of fact for the Industrial Board. There is competent evidence to sustain the award.

Affirmed.

Dausman, J., absent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Remy, J. —

Appellee, having received an injury while in the employment of appellant, filed with the Industrial Board his application for compensation. Contending that appellee was not entitled to compensation because of wilful misconduct, within §8 of the Compensation Act (Acts 1919 p. 158, §9453 Burns 192b), appellant presented the issue by a special answer. No other issue being presented, a hearing resulted in an award for appellee, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

The question was one of fact for the Industrial Board. There is competent evidence to sustain the award.

Affirmed.

Dausman, J., absent.

Cunningham Construction Co. v. Morgan, 156 N.E. 524, 86 Ind. App. 387, 1927 Ind. App. LEXIS 121 (Ind. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

156 N.E. 524 (Cunningham Construction Co. v. Morgan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related