Peitz v. Industrial Accident Board Peitz v. Industrial Accident Board

Peitz v. Industrial Accident Board

127 MONT. 316, 264 P.2D 709, 1953.MT.0000085

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

WORKMENS COMPENSATION ? Evidence sustained finding of accidental injury ? EVIDENCE ? Board may not disregard uncontradicted evidence ? SECOND INJURIES ? Compensable. 1. Workmens Compensation ? Purpose of Workmens Compensation Act. Purpose of Workmens Compensation Act is to determine loss of ability and earning capacity after the accidental injury in relation to such capacity and ability as was had before the injury. - Page 317 2. Workmens Compensation ? Evidence sustained finding of district court. In proceeding upon claim of laborer for compensation, evidence sustained finding of district court that claimant was suffering from the accidental injury of a broken back, which totally and permanently disabled him for manual labor. 3. Workmens Compensation ? Board may not disregard uncontradicted evidence. The Industrial Accident Board may not, without cause or reason, disregard or refuse to give effect to uncontradicted evidence nor may it refuse to believe and to act upon credible evidence which is unquestioned and undisputed. 4. Workmens Compensation ? Compensation for prior injury not deductible. Where Claimant, some three years before injury for which he sought compensation, had suffered an industrial accident to a different segment of his body, for which he drew compensation for approximately two or two and one-half months, but was not receiving compensation at time of his last injury, nor were such prior payments commuted or paid in a lump sum, such compensation as was paid for the prior injury was not required to be deducted from the present claim. 5. Workmens Compensation ? Physical condition on entering employment. Under workmens compensation laws, employer takes employee subject to his physical condition at time he enters employment. 6. Workmens Compensation ? Second injury. Where a man has been injured he may in future years be able to resume full gainful employment, and if he does, there is no reason why disability from an unscheduled industrial accidental injury, which would bring anyone else total permanent disability benefits, should yield him only half as much. 7. Workmens Compensation ? Judgment and award affirmed. Where undisputed evidence before district court on appeal in compensation case from decision of Industrial Accident Board is sufficient to sustain the courts judgment, such judgment will be affirmed, notwithstanding contrary findings by board.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1953
8 December
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
11
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
63.4
KB

More Books by Supreme Court of Montana

St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. v. Glassing St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. v. Glassing
1994
Matter of J.S. & P.S Matter of J.S. & P.S
1994
Curtis & Vilensky v. District Court Curtis & Vilensky v. District Court
1994
Watkins v. Williams Watkins v. Williams
1994
State v. Phillips State v. Phillips
1954
Gullickson v. Mitchell Gullickson v. Mitchell
1942