Johnson v. Mary Charlotte Mining Co.

165 N.W. 650, 199 Mich. 218, 1917 Mich. LEXIS 968
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 27, 1917
DocketDocket No. 139
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 165 N.W. 650 (Johnson v. Mary Charlotte Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnson v. Mary Charlotte Mining Co., 165 N.W. 650, 199 Mich. 218, 1917 Mich. LEXIS 968 (Mich. 1917).

Opinion

Kuhn, C. J.

{after stating the facts). It is the: contention of claimant’s counsel that the work the decedent was doing at the time that he met his death, was hard and laborious, and that it would be impossible to say that this hard work, done just prior to his. death, was not the proximate cause thereof. The testimony of the physicians showed that in the condition that the decedent was in, death might have come to him while lying quiet, even while taking a breath. We are not satisfied that this record discloses, or that-there is any evidence to warrant the claim, that any accident occurred or that anything unforeseen or unexpected happened in the performance of his work at the time in quéstion. The deceased was doing the work which he had been engaged to do, in the usual way. The evidence is conclusive that when stricken with heart failure, he collapsed and sank, or fell, and sustained superficial scratches or bruises on his face, which are not claimed to have contributed in any way to his death. The case of Schroetke v. Jackson-Church Co., 193 Mich. 616 (160 N. W. 383, L. R. A. 1917D, 64), is relied upon by the claimant. We are, however, of the opinion that that case is distinguishable from the situation now before us, as it was made clearly to appear that there was in that case an unexpected and fortuitous event, viz., the fire which the deceased attempted to extinguish, and as a result of his efforts to that end and to give an alarm, and of the attendant excitement, he died of heart failure. In that case the court said:

“In the instant case the whole circumstance, including the fire, the overexertion and the excitement of the deceased, may be said to have been an accident. It was certainly a fortuitous circumstance.”

The case of Kutschmar v. Briggs Manufacturing Co., 197 Mich. 146 (163 N. W. 933), is more similar to the case before us. There the employee as in the case [221]*221at bar, was engaged at the moment of his injury in his usual and ordinary employment and in the usual and ordinary way.

It not having been made to appear that at the time claimant’s decedent met his death any fortuitous or unusual circumstance occurred, it follows that there is no evidence of an accident, and that the board erred in so holding and in awarding compensation, which can be only awarded for accidental injury by the terms of the act. Stombaugh v. Wire Fence Co., 198 Mich. 445 (164 N. W. 537); Van Gorder v. Motorcar Co., 195 Mich. 588 (162 N. W. 107).

The judgment is reversed.

Stone, Ostrander, Bird, Moore, Steere, Brooke, and Fellows, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Bergagna v. Department of Labor & Industries
91 P.2d 551 (Washington Supreme Court, 1939)
Twork v. Munising Paper Co.
266 N.W. 311 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1936)
Martin v. State Compensation Commission
149 S.E. 824 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1929)
Chief Consol. Mining Co. v. Salisbury
210 P. 929 (Utah Supreme Court, 1922)
Crosby v. Thorp, Hawley & Co.
172 N.W. 535 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1919)
Perkins v. Jackson Cushion Spring Co.
172 N.W. 374 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1919)
Roach v. Kelsey Wheel Co.
167 N.W. 33 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)
Tackles v. Bryant & Detwiler Co.
167 N.W. 36 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)
Guthrie v. Detroit Shipbuilding Co.
167 N.W. 37 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
165 N.W. 650, 199 Mich. 218, 1917 Mich. LEXIS 968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-mary-charlotte-mining-co-mich-1917.