Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-12-23
HIGH COURT HOLDS
DAMAGES|MPR0PER
IN ACCIDENT CASES
Renders Two Important Decis-
ions Of Rights Of Employees
to Recover for Injuries.
4Iribune,s Helena Bureaul

Helena, Dec. 22.-Among the OPINIONS
handed down by the supreme rourt
during the present week We're two III
important cases affecting the right OF
employees to recover for injuries. IN
both of these eases the high court re-
ment had been entered fer S2u,Utl3 IN
one action and for $4,000 in tie other,
and remanded the causes with instrlc-
tions to dismiss the complaints,
In one of these proceedings the clam
Of the plaintiff came into conflict with
the provisions of the Montana work
mems compensation act and II was be-
cause Of the fact that compensation
had been accepted that the supreme
court held the plaintiff had no stand
ing in his effort to obtain additional
relief.
This was the case brought by VIII
liam l.. Bruce, as administrator of the
estate Of Q. Price, deceased. against
the federal railroad administration Tor
damages for the death of Price while
in the employ of the Star Coal com
pany at Musselshell. March ., 1919.
Price was engaged in the act OF
moving a box car along a side track
of the Milwaukee railroad to the coal
tipple of the coal company when. by
reason of the dropping or a brake beam
which permitted the brake shoe to
catch il d switch frog. the car was
suddenly stopped and Price pitched off
the car and landed upon his head.
sustaining injuries from which he died
the same day.
~Received Compensation
At the time of the death Of Price
the coal company was operating under
n. - r. Al, ,', ,N, \, Am , tior n
act and his dependents later applied
for compensation and received $40 for
funeral expenses, $50 for family sup
port and later received and accepted a
lump sum settlement in the sum of
$4,000 in satisfaction of all claims
against the state for the death of Price.
Then the administrator of the estate
filed suit against the railroad admins
tration for damages on the grounds OF
negligence upon the part of the de-
PENDANT in delivering to the coal com
pany q defective car. Ginning the
complaint to be insufficient objection
was made by the defendant to the in
PRODUCTION of testimony in it's support.
while motions for non-suit, and for a
directed verdict were denied. The Jury
returned a verdict for the plaintiff for
$4,000 upon which judgment was
entered.
The supreme court, in an opinion
delivered by Associate Justice ~.aen,
holds that while many errors are as
signed by the defendant in his appeal
the determinative question is.
Are the provisions of the work
mems compensation act exclusive as
10 damages for an accident resulting
in the death of an employe at the
plant or premises of his employer, or
may the widow and dependents of the
injured employe collect under the act,
and at the same time a right Of action
survive in the administrator of the
decedent's cstate?"
After discussing numerous points of
law the opinion holds:
Independent of the decisions from
other states, we think our statute is
plain and Advantageous. > The
statute declares that the employer who
elects to come within the provisions of
the act shall not be subject to any
liability whatsoever for death or per-
sonal injury of an employe except as
IN the act provided, and that all
causes of action, actions at law, suits
in equity, and proceedings whatsoever,
and all statutory and ~common-law
rights and remedies for or on account
of injury or death of an employe are
abolished"