Klodek v. May Creek Logging Co.

Citations

• 71 Wash. 573
• 129 P. 99
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1368

Syllabus

<p>Appeal — Review—Harmless Error. Error in the exclusion of evidence is not prejudicial, where from the whole record it appears that the fact was established by other evidence.</p> <p>Master and Servant — Injury to Servant — Medical Attendance —Competency of Physician — Evidence—Admissibility. Upon an issue as to whether an employer had provided a competent surgeon to treat a servant’s injured knee, it is competent and relevant to show that the surgeon was holding himself out as an eye and nose specialist.</p> <p>Same — Furnishing Medical Attendance — Defenses —Special Contract. The fact that an employer in deducting hospital dues was acting under a contract with a hospital association and turned over all dues to it, does not relieve the master from liability for failing to provide proper medical attendance, under a special contract with the servant to do so.</p> <p>Same. While a finding, contrary to the evidence, that an employer retained part of the hospital dues, which it collected for a hospital association, is technically inconsistent with a general verdict for the plaintiff based on the fact that the hospital was the employer’s agent, it is not hostile thereto, where the employer had made a special contract to provide medical attendance to injured workmen.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Verdict. The question of agency is usually one of fact for the jury, whose verdict on conflicting evidence will not he disturbed.</p>