Montana labor news., 1936-02-20
Supreme Court Liberal
ICES Compensation Act
Continued From Last Week.

case Of either injury or sickness, I'M
der the Act, compensation can be awar-
ded only for injury suffered by reason
Of the happening OF an industrial ac-
cident, and to secure an award the in
iured workman must prove to the Boa
I'd bv a perponderance of the evidence
that Cd the injury complained Of re-
suited from an industrial accident, ~
arising out of and 90 in the course
of his employment. The term "out Of
-presupposes a causal connection be
tween the employment and the injury
and the words in the course of" re-
fer to the time, place and circumst-
ances under which the accident occur
ed. nandeen v. Toole County Rein
erw IS Mont. 2-Callaway). Gener-
ally speaking, in plain terms, this means
that the workman may only be COM
pensated for an injury inflicted upon
him by an accident occurring while he
is working at his regular employment,
during working hours and at the place
where he is required by his employer
to work, but exceptions to this rule
will be shown later, as laid down by
the supreme court in literally constru-
ing the act to conform to the inten-
ton OF the legislature and the humane
purpose of the legislation.
Having secured his right to proper
medical and surgical attention, hospi-
talization and medicines, the next con-
Germ Of the injured man and those act
ing in his behalf is to see that his right
to compensation is not j~eopardized by
neglect to do that which the law de-
~clares must be done. The legislature,
seeking to protect both the employer
and employee, has declared positively
that mo claim to recover compensa-
ton under this act for injuries not re-
~sulting in death shall be maintained, I'M
less, within sixty days after the oc-
%currance OF the accident **** notice in
writing, stating the name and address
OF the person injured and the nature
of the injury, and signed by the per
son injured or someone in his behalf,
shall be served upon the employer or
the insured; provided that actual know
ledge Of such accident or injury, or the
part of the employer or his managing
= agent or superintendent in charge Of
a., the work *** shall be equivalent to
+ such service" (Section 2933 r. c. 192)
and that IN case OF personal injury
or death, all claims shall be forever
barred unless presented in writing, UNI
+ der oath, to the employer, the insurer,
or the board **** within six months
, from the date Of the happenings Of
the accident, either by the claimant or
someone legally authorized to act for
, him or on his behalf (Section 2899,
. r. c, 1921).
The requirement Of notice is held not
e to apply to an injured mar while he is
. mentally incompetent by reason of his
injury, but the statute begins to run,
Y in such cases, when he regains mental
{ competency. (Maki v. A. c. M. Co.,
b S7 Mont. 314-Matthews).
r While the board and the courts are
e powerless to award compensation on
T failure TO file the required claim with
S in the statutory period, Civilians V. A.
&c. M. Co. 90 Mont, 204-Anderson), and
the legislature itself cannot revive a
e. dead claim in favor OF an individual
= Estate ex rel Roundup Coal Co., "a
Z Mont. 386-StewarD, where the employ
= er or insurer, with notice or knowledge
e misleads the injured men into believ-
ing that his compensation will be paid
t and, acting on this reasonable belief
e he fails to file his sworn claim within
the six months, the employer or in
surer is estopped from relying on the
statute as a defense (Lindblom V, En-
T. ployer's Assurance Co. SO Mont. 488-
n Ford,)
The legislature has limited and pres
cribed the conditions under which com
pensation may be awarded and has
N made the Act one of compensation fol-
accidental injuries, but not health in
4 surance, and neither the board nor the
courts may award compensation in cas-
N es for which no compensation is pro.
vided in the statutes (Kerns v, A. C. M
Co., 81 Mont, $40 Matthew'S, but with
in the limits prescribed there is room
for the exercise OF d%iscreation and lib
crafty Of construction as the statute
N cannot forsee and provide for every
. contingency which may arise.
q Thus, while the letter of the law re.
N quires that, in order to be compens-
able, the accident must have occurred
z while the workman was actually en-
gagged in the work for which he wa,
N employed, the mere fact that a work
man was on a public street or adjacen'
premises or elsewhere on his employ
N ers' premises than his place OF work
does not bar compensation if, in fac.
r. there was causal connection be.
N tween the injury and the employ.
. ment. Thus, where a workman, on hi
n way to work was required to enter thu
N premises through a way which subject.
ed him to risk other than that to which
the general public was subject, his in.
NJ Jury at such place was suffered in thu
N course OF his employment" (HerbersoI
Div. Great Falls Wood & Coal Co. 8,
NJ Mont. 527-Galen).
N Again, where a workmen, at the clos,
of his shift, is required to leave tn,
NJ premises through a way that is no
IN safe for him to go and there suffered
injury or death by reason of the risl
u to which he has thus been rendered
IN subject, he, or his beneficiaries, may