Case ID: ind-app_83/html/0555-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Remy, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Radanovic v. Vermillion Coal Company.
    [No. 12,435.
    Filed October 30, 1925.]
    Master and Servant.—Workmen’s Compensation Act makes a parent’s dependency on son or daughter a question of fact for Industrial Board.—Under §§37 and 38 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (§§9482, 9483 Burns 1926), the extent of a parent’s dependency on a son or daughter is a question of fact for the Industrial Board, and its decision must be accepted on appeal if there is any evidence to sustain it.
    From Industrial Board of Indiana.
    Claim for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act by Djuja. Radanovic against the Vermillion Coal Company. From an award for claimant on a finding that she was only partially dependent, she appeals. Affirmed. By the court in banc.
    
      Peter B. Nelson, Dumas V. McFall and Defrees, Buckingham & Eaton, for appellant.
    
      Will H. Hays, Hinkle C. Hays, Alonzo .C. Owens, W. Paul Stratton, John S. Taylor, William H. Bridwell and George W. Buff, for appellee.
   Remy, C. J.

George Radanovic lost his life as the result of an accident which arose out of and in the course of his employment by appellee. Appellant, the mother of Radanovic, claiming that, at the time of the death of her son, she was wholly dependent on him for support, made application for compensation. The Industrial Board found that appellant was but partially dependent upon her son, and made an award accordingly. From the award, appellant prosecutes this appeal. The only question for determination is whether the award is sustained by sufficient evidence. Under §§37 and 38 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Acts 1919 p. 158, §§9482, 9483 Burns 1926, §§8020ul and 8020vl Burns’ Supp. 1921), the extent of a parent’s dependency upon a son or daughter, in a case like the one under consideration, is a question of fact for the Industrial Board. Rasin v. Miami Coal Co. (1922), 79 Ind. App. 123, 137 N. E. 529.

No good purpose would be served by a discussion of the evidence. It is sufficient to say that we have examined the testimony, and find that the award is sustained by sufficient evidence.

Affirmed.