Flucker v. Carnegie Steel Co.
Citations
- 263 Pa. 113
- 106 A. 192
- 1919 Pa. LEXIS 381
Syllabus
<p>Workmen’s compensation — Duties of referee — Findings of fad —Ad of June 2, 1915, P. L. 786 — Suicide—Circumstantial evidence — Burden of proof — Course of employment — Presumption.</p> <p>1. In a proceeding under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, the referee should make hisj findings of fact so comprehensive and explicit as to disclose the full story of the accident, but as those charged with the grave responsibility of finding the facts are not required to be learned in the law, and, in many cases, lack the assistance of trained practitioners, the same precision in their adjudications as otherwise might. be looked for, expected, and required, can not be insisted upon.</p> <p>2. The act contemplates brevity and simplicity in all matters of practice, but if a referee entirely fails to pass upon any material matter of fact, covered by the evidence, which either side considers, in event of an appeal to the courts, may be vital to its case, those affected should apply to the compensation board for assistance in that respect, on a hearing de novo.</p> <p>3. In proceedings under the Workmen’s Compensation Act the burden of proving suicide is upon the employer.</p> <p>4. In such proceedings a referee’s findings of fact may be based on circumstantial evidence.</p> <p>5. An ultimate conclusion upon which an award rests that “deceased met his death from injuries received by accident occurring in the course of his employment,” is in a measure a mixed question of fact and law. As the compensation act undertakes to define the meaning of the phrase “injury by an accident in the course of his employment,” in each instance the question of law is presented as to whether pr not the underlying findings of fact are sufficient to bring the case within the statutory definition; but this, however, does not warrant any interference by the courts with such findings of fact whether they be based on proved facts or inference therefrom.</p> <p>6. Where no facts appear indicating anything to
Judges: Brown, Fox, Moschzisker, Simpson, Stewart, Walling
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.