Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1915-07-23
BRAKEMAN'S CASE DECIDED
Compensation William B. Miller Under
State ActInstead of Federal Liability Law-Sets Aside
$500 Agreement That Had Been Compensation
for Employe of Lumber Firm.

er Donohue. that this was not a settle
naent in accordance with the terms of
said act. AS the question OF compen-
sation Is entirely one of contract, and
as this settlement is not in accordance
with the terms of the contract it would
not be valid release.
The authorities cited by the attorney
for the respondent would afford con-
siderable support If this were an action
in tort, but it seems that the relation
between these two parties was one of
contract, and the recovery is not de-
pendent upon the fault of the employ
er, but on the terms of the contract
made.
In concluding his finding, the COM
missioner says:
Only last week the supreme court of
New York state handed down a de-
cision holding that employees of all in
terstate railroads and boat lines owned
by railroads operating within the state
come under the provisions of the COM
pensation law. DispoSing Of the claim
that the law was meant to apply to
intraState commerce. 1t was held that
If such was the intention of the law
it would have said so plainly. The
opinions were rendered on appeals by
the Southern Pacific company, owners
of railroads and steamships, and the
decisions were affirming the awards
made by the workmen's compensation
commission of the state of New York.
Up to the present time the states of
New York, New Jersey and Connecti-
cut have acted in harmony upon this
particular question, all OF which shows
that the federal employers liability act
is an act passed for the purpose of
taking care OF a certain class OF in
jurieS, and is in no sense a compensa-
ton law, and that it does not operate
to invalidate a contract made under
the workmen's compensation law.
It seems to me that the settlement
of this case should be under the work.
mems compensation act and based on
the original contract of employment
made between employer and employee,
and that any settlement should be
strictly in accordance with the terms
Of said act.
Award in Landry Case.
Commissioner Donohue has also
made his award and finding in the case
of Joseph Landry, r. F. D. No. s, Nor
witch, claimant. and H. F. & A ].
Dawley, respondents. He orders that
the respondent pay to the claimant
week from June 20, 1915, to July 10,
1915 (date of hearing), both dates
inclusive. amounting to SIPS, for
three and six-sevenths weeks, compen-
sation to be continued at same rate and
on same basis during total disability
from July 10. 1915, this award being
subject to future modification.
The finding states the case as fol-
lows:
On June % 1914, while in the en-
ploy of the respondent, claimant re-
ceived an injury caused by his hand
being caught when some timbers which
he was handling fell out of the hooks,
same injury consisting Of three broken
bones in the palm of his left hand. Said
injury arose out of and in the course
of his employment.
It was agreed that the average
weekly wages of the claimant were
$685.
On the 18th of July, 1915, employer
and employe enter into a. voluntary
agreement whereby employer was to
pay to employee SIS weekly during in
capacity, commencing July s, 1914.
medical, surgical and hospital expense,
etc.
Weekly payments on above basis
have been made up to June %, 1915
$50 weeks at SIS per weel1), at which
time payments had been stopped be-
cause the insurer of the respondent
considered at that time that claimant
was able to work
In the testimony the claimant stated