TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Jones v. Campbell, Wyant & Cannon Foundry Co.

Jones v. Campbell, Wyant & Cannon Foundry Co., 279 N.W. 860 (Mich. 1938)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 6, 1938
Docket
Nos. 29, Calendar No. 39,909.
Judges
Wiest, Butzel, Bushnell, Sharpe, Potter, Chandler, North, McAllister
Citations
279 N.W. 860284 Mich. 3581938 Mich. LEXIS 502

Opinion of the Court — Wiest

Wiest, C. J.

In February, 1937, plaintiff was employed in defendant’s foundry, breaking up and putting slag in buckets, to be removed by a motor truck, operated by others. While he was running an electric truck, as he claims, by permission of its regular operator, a fellow employee grabbed hold of him and, to support himself, he seized the reverse operat *359 ing lever, the truck moved backward, bumped him against a wall and he sustained a fracture of the left pelvis. He was in a hospital for several weeks and made a good recovery.

The department of labor and industry awarded him compensation during the period of disability and for hospital expenses.

Defendant prosecutes review, contending that plaintiff was injured by the horseplay of a fellow employee and, therefore, not by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.

The evidence negatived any motive on the part of the fellow employee, outside of playfulness. The department entertained and expressed the opinion that, inasmuch as plaintiff was not a participant in the play, the decisions of this court in so-called horseplay instances did not control.

In Tarpper v. Weston-Mott Co., 200 Mich. 275 (L. R. A. 1918E, 507), the victim of a fellow servant’s horseplay was not a participant, nor was the victim in Steffes v. Ford Motor Co., 239 Mich. 501 , and in both cases it was held there could be no award.

Had the fellow employee assaulted plaintiff there could be no award.

Marshall v. Baker-Vawter Co., 206 Mich. 466 . In such ease there is also no participation by the victim.

The department was in error and the award is vacated, with costs to defendant.

Butzel, Bushnell, Sharpe, Potter, Chandler, North, and McAllister, JJ., concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1941: 11957: 11958: 119412026peak 1941 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Crilly v. Ballou91 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 1958)
  2. Freiborg v. Chrysler Corporation85 N.W.2d 145 (Mich. 1957)
  3. Cohn v. Dowling123 F.2d 408 (6th Cir. 1941)

Most recent

  1. Crilly v. Ballou91 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 1958)
  2. Freiborg v. Chrysler Corporation85 N.W.2d 145 (Mich. 1957)
  3. Cohn v. Dowling123 F.2d 408 (6th Cir. 1941)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Tarpper v. Weston-Mott Co., 166 N.W. 857 (Mich. 1918) 25
Marshall v. Baker-Vawter Co., 173 N.W. 191 (Mich. 1919) 16
Steffes v. Ford Motor Co., 214 N.W. 953 (Mich. 1927) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list