Kennedy v. Hull & Dillon Packing Co.

285 P. 536, 130 Kan. 191, 1930 Kan. LEXIS 133
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedMarch 8, 1930
DocketNo. 29,264
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 285 P. 536 (Kennedy v. Hull & Dillon Packing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kennedy v. Hull & Dillon Packing Co., 285 P. 536, 130 Kan. 191, 1930 Kan. LEXIS 133 (kan 1930).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Johnston, C. J.:

This case involves a claim for compensation under the workmen’s compensation law. Samuel G. Kennedy was an employee of the Hull & Dillon Packing Company, and had been for about twenty-five years, and on June 20, 1928, suffered an injury which resulted in his death. The plaintiff, his widow, made a claim for compensation, and she was allowed compensation in the amount of $4,000, and the sum of $150 for funeral expenses. The [192]*192Packing Company and the insurance carrier, the United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, appealed from the award of the commission to the district court, where the findings and award of the commission were affirmed. The defendants appeal.

Samuel G. Kennedy was a traveling salesman and collector for the packing company located at Pittsburg, Crawford county, Kansas, and Kennedy was a resident of Pittsburg. His salary was $33 per week, and he was allowed not to exceed $22 per week for expenses. The packing company allotted him certain territory in which to solicit and collect. He was expected to call on the trade in the territory allotted to him, being the towns of Opolis, in Crawford county, Kansas; Columbus, Crestline, Galena and Lawton in Cherokee county, Kansas; Hoclcerville, Quapaw, Century, Picher, Carden and Commerce, in Ottawa county, Oklahoma; Waco, As-bury, Carl Junction and Smithfield, in Jasper county, Missouri. On the morning of June 20, 1928, he started on a trip from Pitts-burg, expecting to make his first call at Crestline, in Cherokee county, and when he reached a point eight and one-half miles south of Pittsburg, he ran into an electric wire which had been thrown across the road in a storm, and was killed.

The contention of the defendant is that his death did not arise out of and in the course of his employment, in that he was on his way to assume the duties of his employment but had not reached the first stopping place on the trip. The first town that he was to make that day was Crestline, which was about sixteen miles from Pittsburg. It is insisted that Pittsburg, his home, from which he was traveling, although in the county of Crawford, was not one of the towns he was to make, and that he was not required to live at Pittsburg, where the plant is located. The orders that were taken by him were reported to the packing company by telephone, and no direct evidence was produced as to his going to the office of the plant when he turned in the money collected and made settlements with the defendant packing company. It was shown that the pay roll closed on each Saturday and the workmen were paid the following Tuesday. The evidence is that at all times when traveling in his district he was under the supervision of his employer. Since he was a traveling salesman in a designated territory, the traveling was a part of his duty, and he was at liberty to select his course in going from one store to another within that territory. The commissioner found that such a salesman is a necessary part of the trade or business of the packing company, and is as necessary a [193]*193part of selling meat products and collecting the price of them as an employee who works in the plant slaughtering animals. The defendants emphasize the fact that Kennedy was not required to live in Pittsburg, that he could have lived in any one of the towns where there were stores that he visited. He chose to live in Pitts-burg, where no calls were to be made on the trade and therefore could not be regarded as being in the course of his employment. It is also contended that the injury and death were caused by an act of God, that the storm which blew down the poles carrying the high-powered electric wires produced his death, was a common hazard, had no causal connection with his employment and should be regarded as an act of God, something that no human foresight could anticipate or prevent. On the other hand, it is said that the violent storm which blew down the poles carrying the wires had ceased and his death was caused by wires of high voltage thrown to and left on the highway, and in no sense was caused by the violence of nature; that the deceased lost his life through a human agency, namely the electric wires and the poles carrying them.

It is claimed that the defendant was operating under the workmen’s compensation law, and that Kennedy was one of its employees, who solicited orders for its products in an allotted territory and made collections from its customers. Being a traveling salesman, he was required to use the highways in calling on customers within the zone assigned to him. In that zone were the towns already mentioned in Crawford and Cherokee counties, Kansas, Ottawa county, Oklahoma, and Jasper county, Missouri, and he was traveling towards Crestline, in "Cherokee county, when he was injured and killed. Was he within the allotted zone of his operations and in the course of his employment so as to make the injury a compensable one? If his duties as traveling salesman re~ quired him to travel over the highway where he was killed, with its well-known hazards, one of which he encountered, the action should be regarded to be in his working place and in the course of his employment. (Tierney v. Telephone Co., 114 Kan. 706, 220 Pac. 190.) It is contended that he was not in the allotted territory until he reached Crestline, the first town he was to visit upon that day. It is claimed that he could choose his own place of residence, and that if he chose a residence out of his territory and was on his way to assume the duties of his employment at the time of the accident, [194]*194the accident cannot be regarded as arising out of and in the course of his employment, any more than could a mechanic whc was injured while on his way to his shop, where he was employed to work, be regarded as entitled to compensation. The boundaries of Kennedy’s allotted territory were not definitely fixed, nor were the highways over which he was to travel in the performance of his duty prescribed. For some reason, whether for his own convenience or that of his employer, or that of both, he made his home in Pitts-burg, the place where defendant’s plant was located. An assistant to the president of defendant packing company,- and the manager, testified that he had allotted the territory to Kennedy and given him a route sheet, showing the town's- to be visited, and that the usual time for him to start on trips was about seven-thirty in the morning, and to return to Pittsburg from his work from five to seven in the evening, depending upon the progress of his work during the day. The salesmen were required to report to the defendant packing company while at work, phoning in orders taken, and the manager said, “we want to know where they are at all times of the day,” and that while traveling they are under the supervision of the company. He further stated that in the performance of his duties for the company Kennedy used the highway on which he was killed. He fiad seen Kennedy the Sunday before the accident, but couldn’t remember seeing him on Tuesday, pay day, which was the day preceding the accident. It is argued that as he was not required to call on customers in Pittsburg, that place was not within his territory, but it appears that he was expected to go from that place in the morning and return to it in the evening. He could and did phone to the plant orders when taken, but he could not phone in the money collected from customers. It may be assumed that he went to headquarters and made settlements with the defendant of the money received and of his expense account, which was not to exceed $22 per week, and receive his salary, $33 per week.

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

Related

Atkins v. Webcon
419 P.3d 1 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2018)
Scott v. Hughes
275 P.3d 890 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2012)
Halford v. Nowak Construction Co.
186 P.3d 206 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2008)
Sumner v. Meier's Ready Mix, Inc.
144 P.3d 668 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2006)
Butera v. Fluor Daniel Construction Corp.
18 P.3d 278 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 2001)
Messenger v. Sage Drilling Co.
680 P.2d 556 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1984)
Hensley v. Carl Graham Glass
597 P.2d 641 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1979)
Chapman v. Victory Sand & Stone Co.
416 P.2d 754 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1966)
Teague v. Boeing Airplane Co.
312 P.2d 220 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1957)
Pearson v. Electric Service Co.
201 P.2d 643 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1949)
Crawford v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
199 P.2d 796 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1948)
Abbott v. Southwest Grain Co.
176 P.2d 839 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1947)
Scott v. Kansas Western Pipe Line Co.
146 P.2d 366 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1944)
Mitchell v. Mitchell Drilling Co.
114 P.2d 841 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1941)
Ruff v. Farley Machine Works Co.
99 P.2d 789 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1940)
Gillispie v. Martin
82 P.2d 1091 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1938)
Stapleton v. State Highway Commission
76 P.2d 843 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1938)
Kirkpatrick v. Yeamans Motor Co.
54 P.2d 960 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1936)
Stager v. Sinclair Refining Co.
54 P.2d 969 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1936)
Covert v. John Morrell & Co.
27 P.2d 553 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
285 P. 536, 130 Kan. 191, 1930 Kan. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kennedy-v-hull-dillon-packing-co-kan-1930.