The Fulton County news. [volume] (McConnellsburg, Pa.) 1899-current, 1917-09-27
MAKING UNIQUE
LIABILITY RULES
Driving Load Of Lumber to a
corncrib Not One of the vO-
cations Covered by Risk.
WRONG ELEVATOR RIGHT
Many Appeals Are Dismisoed-Reck-
less Man, Who Took II Against
Orders, "Furtherins Employ
er's Business"

-1dTTlSDuTB'
Thirty or more decisions were an
nounced at the Office OF the State
Workmens Compensation Board, in
.cluding a dozen in which compensa-
tion awards made to employees OF rail
roads engaged In interstate commerce
and governed by decisions OF Federal
Courts were set aside.
Among the appeals dismissed was
one in which a claim for compensation
for dependents OF man killed while
engaged in farm labor was refused
Commissioner James w. Leech hold
ing that there could be no compensa-
tion given for a man driving team
loaded with lumber for a corncrib, un-
der the existing State laws He add
ed that the counsel for the appellants
should have presented hi arguments
10 the Legislature, or may yet be
urged to go before an appellate court
The Board would be pleased to have
the whole question passed upon by
the appellate courts"
In affirming an award in the case Of
Chermiak VS.. the Pennsylvania Sugar
Company, the Board found that the
man was engaged in furthering mis-
employers work, even though in going
TO obtain drinking water he used a
prohibited elevator and was killed by
II. The Board holds that at the time
the man was not in his luncn period,
and that his errand was fully as much
in the furtherance OF his employers
business as though he mad been going
to fetch tools or any other necessary
equipment This being so, II is i'm
material that he selected a means OF
transportation which was not only pro-
hibited by his employer, but was so
dangerous that the attempt to use 1t
was reckless to the point OF foolhardi'
ness"
IN the case of Hemmig VS.. the Fish,
er Hosiery Company, Berks County
case, II was held that an employee who
Iell down stairs after completing a
days work and was not injured be-
cause OF the condition of the stairs, was
not entitled to compensation. In the
opinion, after a rehearing, Of Carr vs..
the Pennsylvania Railroad, the man is
awarded compensation for being nurt
through being showed off bench dur
ing a rest period at station.
Appeals dismissed include Kelly VS..
Midvale Steel Company. Philadelphia; !;
Wallace VS.. Meadow Hill Coal Com
pany, Scranton; Geffken VS.. Martin,
York; Roskowski VS.. Pittsburgh Coal
Company, Pittsburgh; Quigley VS.. Nc
Dowe.l Paper Company. Philadelphia !;
Pfeffer VS.. Republic Iron & Steel Com
pany, Youngstown, O.; Love VS.. Mar
shall Coal Company, Pittsburgh Bry.
all VS.. Delaware & Hudson Company
Scranton; Herbert VS.. Pennsylvania
Railroad, Pittsburgh; Achey VS.. Phil
Rdelphia G Reading Railway, Philade!.
phia; Chovic VS.. Pittsburgh Crucible
Steel Company, Pittsburgh; Hazlett
VS.. Buchanan & Rosen, Washington ;
Sasnofsky VS.. South Fork Coal Mining
Company, South Fork; Walters VS.,
Philadelphia & Reading, Pottsville;
Granville VS.. Delaware, Lackawanna &
Western Railroad, Scranton; Blumen,
stine VS.. Philadelphia & Reading, Har'
risburg.
The other cases come under Federal
decisions.