TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

A. & E. Lumber Co. v. Atkinson

A. & E. LUMBER CO. Et Al. v. ATKINSON Et Al.

A. & E. Lumber Co. v. Atkinson, 1939 OK 154, 88 P.2d 634
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 21, 1939
Docket
No. 27826.
Judges
Bayless, Corn, Gibson, Hurst, Danner
Citations
88 P.2d 6341939 OK 154184 Okla. 5301939 Okla. LEXIS 111

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner is the operator of a lumber mill. The respondent was a laborer working inside the mill. On the 25th day of January, 1936, at about 3 o’clock p. m., he sustained an accidental injury resulting in a broken arm. On the 26th day of February, 1987, the State Industrial Commission entered an award for temporary total disability. Petitioner seeks to vacate the award.

Respondent testified that he was a mill worker in the mill of the petitioner at Battiest, in McCurtain county, Okla.; that he was rooming with Clemmie Gamblin, 'one of the workers at the mill, and the house where he was rooming was a mile and a *531 half west of the mill; that he had quit work when the mill closed down at 12 o’clock noon on the 25th day of January, 1936, and had stayed around the premises until approximately 3 o’clock in the afternoon in order to ride home with the said Clemmie Gamblin. It is admitted that he had no directions or instructions to ride with the said Clemmie Gamblin. Respondent’s duties' wore limited to work inside the mill. There is no evidence of an express or implied contract by either Clemmie Gamblin or the petitioner to transport respondent to and from work. Respondent stated that sometimes he walked to work. On the date of the accident he was riding on the back of the truck driven by the said Clemmie Gamblin on the way to the home of the said Clemmie Gamblin when the driver reached a turn in the road and a sudden lurch threw the respondent off the truck and he broke his arm.

We are of the opinion, and hold, that there is no evidence on which to predicate the finding that the injury arose out of and in the course of the employment. Mead Bros. v. State Industrial Commission, 144 Okla. 279 , 291 P. 571 ; Southern Surety Co. v. Cline, 149 Okla. 27 , 299 P. 139 ; Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Lodes, 164 Okla. 51 , 22 P.2d 361 .

The award is vacated.

BAYLESS, C. J., and CORN, GIBSON, HURST, and DANNER, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1941: 11944: 11955: 119412026peak 1941 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Standard Paving Co. v. Newman1944 OK 165, 147 P.2d 983
  2. Lyday v. Holloway1955 OK 262, 293 P.2d 348
  3. Southern States Manufacturing Co. v. Wright200 So. 375 (Fla. 1941)

Most recent

  1. Lyday v. Holloway1955 OK 262, 293 P.2d 348
  2. Standard Paving Co. v. Newman1944 OK 165, 147 P.2d 983
  3. Southern States Manufacturing Co. v. Wright200 So. 375 (Fla. 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 4

DepthCaseCited by
Mead Bros. v. State Indus. Com., 1930 OK 384, 291 P. 571 27
Southern Sur. Co. v. Cline, 1931 OK 253, 299 P. 139 10
Pryor v. Busby, 1933 OK 309, 22 P.2d 361 7
Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Lodes, 1933 OK 299, 22 P.2d 382 6

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