Stuart v. City of Kansas City

Citations

• 102 Kan. 307
• 171 P. 913
• 1918 Kan. LEXIS 34

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Workmen’s Compensation Act — Injuries from, Sportive Acts of Co-employee- — Liability of Employer. ^ An employee was injured by having mortar playfully or wantonly thrown into his eye by a fellow workman. The injured employee was at the time engaged in his regular work of mixing and carrying mortar. The fellow workman was in the habit of playing pranks and jokes on the other workmen, and that habit was known to the immediate superiors of the injured employee. The employment was governed by the workmen’s compensation act. Held, that the injured employee is entitled to' compensation under that act for the injuries inflicted on'him; and further held, that the mere fact that an injury to an employee is occasioned by the sportive .or malicious act of a fellow employee does not of itself establish that the injury arose out of the employment.</p> <p>2. Same — Accident in Course of Employment — Compensation. Under the workmen’s compensation act, a workman who is injured by' accident arising'out of and in the course of the performance of his labor is entitled to compensation,, although he cannot explain how the accident occurred.</p> <p>3. Same — Judgment Not Excessive. The amount of compensation fixed by the judgment does not appear to be excessive.</p>