Court Opinion

ID: 9717753
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:09:53.481672+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:55.082991
License: Public Domain

CONOVER, Judge,
concurring in result.
I concur in the result reached by the majority, but for different reasons than did the majority.
The majority lays down a new rule for determining whether the Industrial Board or a court of general jurisdiction has exelu-sive jurisdiction of a case involving an employer and an injured employee. Suceinetly stated the new rule is
If an injured employee seeks a remedy against or compensation from his employer for personal injury or death by accident, the Industrial Board has exclusive jurisdiction of the case,
without the qualifying factor the accident must arise out of and in the course of the worker's employment.
In my opinion, the jurisdictional rule must contain the qualifying factor. Otherwise, the Industrial Board would have exclusive jurisdiction of cases involving off-the-job injury or death. For example, if an employee is injured when struck by his employer's truck in the middle of town on his day off, the Industrial Board would have exclusive jurisdiction under the new rule proposed. Clearly, the legislature did not intend the Board should have jurisdiction in such cases. The qualifier "arising *131out of and in the course of employment" is an integral part of the rule.
Here, the Industrial Board has exclusive jurisdiction because the case involves the death by accident of an employee which arose out of and in the course of his employment.
For those reasons, I concur in result.