Gardner v. Holland Motor Express, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Gardner v. Holland Motor Express, Inc.

62 N.E.2d 870, 116 Ind. App. 698, 1945 Ind. App. LEXIS 180

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 9, 1945

DocketNo. 17,366.

StatusPublished

This text of 62 N.E.2d 870 (Gardner v. Holland Motor Express, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gardner v. Holland Motor Express, Inc., 62 N.E.2d 870, 116 Ind. App. 698, 1945 Ind. App. LEXIS 180 (Ind. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Crumpacker, P. J.

The Indiana Employment Security Division collected contributions from the appellee at the rate of 2.7 per centum of its reportable payroll for the period beginning February 25, 1942, and ending June 30, 1943. Contending that its proper and legal rate of contribution for such period should have been determined at 0.7 per centum of its reportable payroll the appellee filed a claim with the State Employment Security Board for a refund of the alleged excess contributions so paid in the sum of $899.26. This claim was denied by the board and, *699 upon request of the appellee, the matter was referred to a liability referee who, after a proper hearing, found the fact specially, concluded as a matter of law that the contributions paid by the appellee over the period involved were in no part unlawfully collected and entered an order denying recovery. The appellee thereupon filed its complaint in the Marion Superior Court for a judicial review of the liability referee’s decision, and in due course such decision was reversed by said court and final judgment entered that the appellee recover a refund in the sum of $899.26, together with interest, such being the agreed excess of 0.7 per centum of its reportable payroll paid by the appellee for the period involved. The appellants’ motion for a new trial, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and the legality of the court’s decision, was overruled and this appeal followed upon the single assignment that the court’s ruling on said motion is erroneous.

We are confronted in this case with the identical situation presented by the record in Cause No. 17, 365, Gardner v. Lohmann Construction Co., Inc., ante, p. 132, 62 N. E. (2d) 867, which we have this day decided with a written opinion in which our position is fully set out. On the authority of that case this appeal must be dismissed.

Hamilton, J., not participating.

Note. — Reported in 62 N. E. (2d) 870.

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

Crumpacker, P. J.

The Indiana Employment Security Division collected contributions from the appellee at the rate of 2.7 per centum of its reportable payroll for the period beginning February 25, 1942, and ending June 30, 1943. Contending that its proper and legal rate of contribution for such period should have been determined at 0.7 per centum of its reportable payroll the appellee filed a claim with the State Employment Security Board for a refund of the alleged excess contributions so paid in the sum of $899.26. This claim was denied by the board and, *699 upon request of the appellee, the matter was referred to a liability referee who, after a proper hearing, found the fact specially, concluded as a matter of law that the contributions paid by the appellee over the period involved were in no part unlawfully collected and entered an order denying recovery. The appellee thereupon filed its complaint in the Marion Superior Court for a judicial review of the liability referee’s decision, and in due course such decision was reversed by said court and final judgment entered that the appellee recover a refund in the sum of $899.26, together with interest, such being the agreed excess of 0.7 per centum of its reportable payroll paid by the appellee for the period involved. The appellants’ motion for a new trial, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and the legality of the court’s decision, was overruled and this appeal followed upon the single assignment that the court’s ruling on said motion is erroneous.

We are confronted in this case with the identical situation presented by the record in Cause No. 17, 365, Gardner v. Lohmann Construction Co., Inc., ante, p. 132, 62 N. E. (2d) 867, which we have this day decided with a written opinion in which our position is fully set out. On the authority of that case this appeal must be dismissed.

Hamilton, J., not participating.

Note. — Reported in 62 N. E. (2d) 870.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 N.E.2d 870, 116 Ind. App. 698, 1945 Ind. App. LEXIS 180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-holland-motor-express-inc-indctapp-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack