Mayze v. Town of Forest City

176 S.E. 270, 207 N.C. 168, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 414

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: October 10, 1934
• Status: Published

Opinion

CONNOR, J.

Tbe defendants excepted to tbe finding by tbe Industrial Commission tbat plaintiff was an employee of tbe town of Forest City at tbe time be suffered an injury by accident, wbicb arose out of and in tbe course of bis employment, and contended tbat all tbe evidence showed tbat plaintiff was a relief worker, and not an employee of tbe town of Forest City at tbe time be was injured. Tbis exception was sustained by tbe judge of tbe Superior Court. In tbis there was error. There was evidence at least in support of tbe finding by tbe Industrial Commission, and for tbat reason tbe finding is conclusive. Bryson v. Lamber Co., 204 N. C., 665, 169 S. E., 276.

In Jackson v. Relief Administration, 206 N. C., 274, 173 S. E., 580, and in Bell v. Raleigh, 206 N. C., 275, 173 S. E., 581, all tbe evidence showed tbat at tbe time plaintiff in each case was injured be was working under an assignment by tbe Welfare Department of Wake County and not under a contract with tbe defendants, or with either of them. In tbe instant case tbe plaintiff was employed by tbe Superintendent of Water and Lights of tbe town of Forest City, at wages agreed upon by plaintiff and said superintendent. Tbe fact tbat plaintiff’s wages were paid out of funds procured by tbe town from tbe Deconstruction Finance Corporation was immaterial on tbe question involving tbe relationship between tbe plaintiff and tbe town of Forest City. Such relationship was established by contract between tbe plaintiff and tbe defendant town of Forest City, and for tbat reason was a relationship of employee and employer.

There was error in tbe judgment reversing tbe award of tbe Industrial Commission, and dismissing tbe proceeding. Tbe judgment is

Beversed.

Stacy, C. J., dissents.