Case Name: McCUMMINGS v. ANDERSON THEATRE CO. ET AL.
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1954-03-29
Citations: 225 S.C. 187
Docket Number: 16851
Parties: McCUMMINGS v. ANDERSON THEATRE CO. ET AL.
Judges: Baker, C. J., Stukes, J., and Bruce Littlejohn, Acting Associate Justice, concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 225
Pages: 187–195

Head Matter:
16851
McCUMMINGS v. ANDERSON THEATRE CO. ET AL.
(81 S. E. (2d) 348)
Messrs. Whaley & McCutchen, of Columbia, for appellants,
Messrs. McEachin, Townsend & Zeigler, of Florence, for Respondent,
March 29, 1954.

Opinion:
Taylor, Justice.
The Circuit Judge affirmed in toto the findings of the Commission to the effect that claimant's compensation rate is to be based upon his total earnings and the employer and its carrier appeal to this Court contending that there was error in the following particulars :
1. In affirming the award of the Industrial Commission to respondent, the error being that the uncontradicted evidence establishes that the average weekly wage of respondent, for the purposes of a workmen's compensation claim against the employer, was $6.00 per week, so that the minimum allowance of $5.00 per week compensation benefits was applicable instead of the maximum benefits of $25.00 per week based upon average weekly wages of $61.00 per week.
2. In affirming the award of the Industrial Commission to respondent, the error being that the Workmen's Compensation Law provides that the "average weekly wage," as a basis for computing benefits under that law, is the wage earned by the employee in the employment in which injury occurs, and not the combination of the wages earned in .that and other unconnected employment.
We are of the opinion that both of these questions must be resolved against contentions of appellants as we find no error in the order of the Circuit Court when considered in the light of the questions raised but such is not to be considered as a precedent for the purpose of computing an employee's average weekly wages within the contemplation of the Workmen's Compensation Act.
Inasmuch as the question of how a claimant's weekly wage should be computed is a most important one and no other method other than those above referred to was raised or discussed either in the briefs or in oral argument, we prefer not to pass upon any other method of doing so until properly before this Court and fully argued.
Baker, C. J., Stukes, J., and Bruce Littlejohn, Acting Associate Justice, concur.
Oxner, J., concurs in result.