Norwich bulletin., 1922-03-22
DAVID BENDET7'S WIDOW AWARDED
COMPENSATION FOR HUSBANDS DEATH

carrier, and the Bendett car was travel
ing at rate between S5 and 40 miles
an hour. 1t was not known whether the
Bendett car had chains or not.
1t is found that the <decedent had
no regular hours of employment He
had certain duties to perform, in at
least three. different cities situated Is
to 20 or rs miles apart, between which
cities transportation by train was i'm
possible many times. when the dAcedent
had completed his duties for the COM
pany and was ready to start for home,
as there would be no trains scheduled for
such hours as he wished to travel.
1t IS found that the decedent used his
own automobile at such times as he could
not use trains, which saved time and
accrued to the company's benefit and
it was done for his company's interests,
even though this method of travel was
much more expensive one for the de-
cedent himself. The respondents i'd
mited the use Of the automobile was
known to them and that. It facilitated the
ccmpany's business, and they were not
Interested IN what manner he covered
his territory. except that the allowance
Of $50 Should be the maximum paid at
one time for tran sportatio and that was
paid to the decedent for. the purpose of
his. purchasing a Communication ticket be-
tween Norwich and New London. How
ever, II the decedent did not so use the
money, but instead purchased gasoline
for his automobile. or spent the $50 or
any part Of it toward the running ex-
penses Of his machine, his employer did
not object to this procedure and did not
at any time object to the deeedent's us
ing his. AUTOMOBILE for business connect
ed with the Mohfcan Company. While
the company did not "authorize' him
to use the automobile they had full
knowledge that he did use it to facili-
tate the eonlpany's business, and permit
ted him to do So se
1t is found that the decedent had
transacted business for his employer in
New London on the night in question
and that he nd not leave there until 10
p m, and while returning to his home
| in Norwich he received injuries because
of an automobile accident which re-
| resulted fatally a few days later. In
view of the circumstances described it Is
found that said injuries arose out Of
| and in the course Of the decedents en-
| ploynent.
Briefs were submitted by the attorneys
| for the claimant and respondents which
| have been carefully considered by the
undersigned, and while the cases cited
| by them are more or less pertinent, none
! of them are parallel cases to the one
| before US, and the circumstances in this
| particular case are such that no Other
| course is found just, except to award fol
| the claimant. in view Of the spirit ana
| purpese of the Workmau's Compensation
Act. 1t being remedial ,statr(,, and t.
| carry out a humane purpose and inten
| Of the act, a liberal constructing shou.(
be placsd upon It.
| In the brief Of the spondent-irsurei
makes three claims: I'D That the iptur!
and death did not arise in the cours
Of decea sed's employment "a That III
| injury end death did not arise out Q
the decedeht's employment. and CD tina
the injury and death were due TO the Sc
rious and. wilful misconduct Of the de
ceased. All three claims are overruled
A memorandum Of decision is attaches
hereto and make part Of this f1ndini
| and award.
In view of the facts as found, It i
hereby awarded, adjudged and decreed
that the respondents shall forthwith pa.
to the claimant through her attorney
compensation at the naxornum rate o
SIS per week from November 18th, 1921
to date of this award. and weekly here
after direct to the claimant at the sam
rate per week during the remainder o
the az week period allowed by tn
statutes in fatal cases; also it Is award
ed adiudged and decreed that the res
spondents shall assume payment of a
| reasonable medical. surgical and hospi
tai bills contracted because Of the in
Jury and death in question, and tina
they shall pay the 800 allowed by tn
statutes toward the, funeral expenses
this award being subject to modifcatio
in case Of the death or re-marriage G
the claimant within the 312 week perio(
Memorandnm Of Decision.
In his memorandum COMMISSIONS
Donohue says in part : A..--...
The facts in the case are found to
agreed to with the Single exception {
I whether the injury and death arose OF
| of and in the course of employ mert, an
| the question of serious and wfful mi
conduct is raised. .....
In his brief the insurer-respondel
makes three claims First. that the il
, course Of the deceased's employment
! second, that the injury and death d
: not arise out Of the deceased's emplo.
ment, and third, that the injury az
death were due to the serious and wifi
misconduct Of the deceased.
= For the matter Of convenience we W
first take UP the third claim, that is Il
!. question of serious and wilful miscol
. duct. In the present case it does n
: seem that this question deserves vel
: serious consideration IN view of the fac
: found. but as It has been raised by Il
!, respondents it is proper we should Co
2 slider it.
: The insurers claim really seems to
that an. intelligent man drove his m
: chine at q, speed Of So to 40 miles {
y hour over a slippery road at night, wi
y no chains on. and ne takes the view tn
We should classify that as serious al
: walful misconduct In~the first place, V
| have no positive evidence that the
!. were no chains used /; In fact, on I'll
y point I think the evidence seems to
II lacking.
= 1t would be rather an unusual THU
e for man to use chains on a night SUI
I, | as the one described when this accide
y occurred I doubt II any automobile o
! on such a night would be very liable
have on chains, especially .when we co
I slider that when, Mr., Beudett started Q
II from New London It was not stornii
at that time, but was getting foggy.
e Undoubtedly Mr.. Bendett was throu
; with his work in New London ard W
lt IN hurry to get. home. and probah
II was going along at pretty good pa
r but we must consider fnat It was at
g time when there was not very much trs
le nc on the roads and when it is possit
y for automobiltsts to travel along at
n pretty good speed with a greater feeli
le Of safety than earlier in the evenir
a when the travel is much heavier. 7 ca
lie not see anything of d serious or will
Is misconduct connected with this ca.
While the accident proved TO be serio,
D. the worst we could say Of it Is that
d may have been caused by poor judgme