Case Name: In the Matter of the Claim of George P. Smith, Respondent, v. George W. Washburn & Co. et al., Appellants. State Industrial Commission, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1918-10-22
Citations: 224 N.Y. 619
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Claim of George P. Smith, Respondent, v. George W. Washburn & Co. et al., Appellants. State Industrial Commission, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 224
Pages: 619–620

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Claim of George P. Smith, Respondent, v. George W. Washburn & Co. et al., Appellants. State Industrial Commission, Respondent.
Smith v.'Washburn & Co., 183 App. Div. 911, affirmed.
(Argued October 2, 1918;
decided October 22, 1918.)
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered March 5, 1918, unanimously affirming-an award of the state industrial commission made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The claimant was employed by the defendant in the business of manufacturing brick, and while engaged in repairing machinery in the brick yard, in the regular course of his employ ment, was struck by an iron bar upon the head, which caused paralysis. As a result of the accident, and since the third day thereafter, he was rendered mentally incompetent, and has been totally disabled from that date. Written notice of the injury was not given the employer within ten days, but the industrial commission found that the accident was reported to the employer-superintendent, then in charge of the brick yard, after the accident, and that since the three days after the accident the condition of the claimant constituted a good and sufficient reason why notice could not have been given. It further found that written claim for compensation was not filed within the year, but that the claimant was mentally incompetent from the third day after the accident and during the period of one year after the injury. The industrial commission, therefore, excused the giving of the written notice and found that no limitation of time in respect to claimant’s failure to file a claim could run as against the claimant because of his mental incompetency.
Bertram L. Pettigrew and W. L. Glenney for appellants.
Merton E. Lewis, Attorney-General (E. C. Aiken of counsel), for State Industrial Commission, respondent.
Leverett J. Luce and Henry C. Quinby for claimant, respondent.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Chase, Cuddeback, Hogan and Crane, Jj. Dissenting: His cock, Ch. J., Collin and McLaughlin, JJ.