Ritchie's Case

222 N.E.2d 687, 351 Mass. 495, 1966 Mass. LEXIS 680
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedDecember 30, 1966
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 222 N.E.2d 687 (Ritchie's Case) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ritchie's Case, 222 N.E.2d 687, 351 Mass. 495, 1966 Mass. LEXIS 680 (Mass. 1966).

Opinion

Wilkins, C.J.

The insurer appeals from a decree of the Superior Court awarding compensation. The reviewing board denied the employee’s claim. The board’s findings, which are at variance with those of the single member, are these. The claimant, approximately eighty-three years of age, was president and treasurer of the insured corporation, a manufacturer of gutters, pipes, and spouts. On January 28,1964, between 9 and 9:30 a.m. he came into the office as usual and walked in the direction of the bookkeeper’s desk. When he was about three or four feet from the desk, still wearing his hat and overcoat, he bent forward reaching his right hand toward the floor to pat a cat and stumbled. A clerk prevented his falling or hitting anything. It was then discovered that he had sustained a fracture of the left humerus. The board found that the claimant was an employee, but that the incident of January 28,1964, was not a personal injury within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. In other words it was not £<a personal injury arising out of and in the course of his employment.” G. L. c. 152, § 26 (as amended through St. 1955, c. 174, § 5).

The decision of the reviewing board superseded that of the single member and must be accepted as final if supported by evidence and not tainted by error of law. Webb’s Case, 318 Mass. 357, 358. It was so supported and was free from taint of error of law. The brief of the employee’s executor follows the findings of the single member who ignored the presence of the cat. The Superior Court had no authority to review the finding of the board and to adopt that of the single member in preference to it. DiGio-vanni’s Case, 255 Mass. 241, 242.

Decree reversed.

Decree to be entered in favor of the insurer.

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

Related

Pettengill v. Curtis
584 F. Supp. 2d 348 (D. Massachusetts, 2008)
Hicks's Case
820 N.E.2d 826 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 2005)
Albanese's Case
389 N.E.2d 83 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1979)
Seymour's Case
381 N.E.2d 1121 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1978)
Bagge's Case
363 N.E.2d 1321 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)
D'Angeli's Case
343 N.E.2d 368 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1976)
D'Angeli's Case
330 N.E.2d 499 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1975)
Lambert's Case
304 N.E.2d 428 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1973)
Putis's Case
257 N.E.2d 469 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Haley's Case
255 N.E.2d 322 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
McGilvray's Case
245 N.E.2d 411 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1969)
Morris's Case
238 N.E.2d 35 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
222 N.E.2d 687, 351 Mass. 495, 1966 Mass. LEXIS 680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ritchies-case-mass-1966.