Whiting-Mead Commercial Co. v. Indus. Accident Comm'n

The district court of appeal for the second appellate district issued a writ of review to test the validity of an award of compensation made by the Industrial Accident Commission. The proceeding resulted in a judgment affirming the award. Upon application of the employer the matter was transferred to this court. Our further examination has led us to a concurrence with the conclusions of the district court of appeal. We, therefore, adopt the opinion of that court, prepared by Works, J., pro tem., as a correct statement of the facts and an adequate treatment of the questions of law arising on those facts. The opinion reads as follows:

The case of Haller v. City of Lansing, 195 Mich. 753 , [L. R. A. 1917E, 394, 162 N. W. 335 ], may be cited as an additional authority supporting the views expressed above.

The award is affirmed.

Melvin, J., Richards, J., pro tem., and Angellotti, C. J., concurred.

I concur.

In concurring I think it proper to say that although petitioner claims in its answer and argument that the applicant should have been denied compensation, on the ground that his injury was the result of his own willful misconduct in violating a rule of the employer prohibiting workmen from smoking, the record contains no evidence tending to show the existence of any such rule, and we cannot, therefore, question the validity of the commission’s finding that the injury was not caused by the willful misconduct of the employee.