LILLIAN SIMONDS v. JAKE REIGEL AND ANOTHER

Minnesota Supreme Court1926-01-08No. No. 25,034

165 Minn. 458

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court affirmed the Industrial Commission's denial of compensation because the employee's death did not arise out of or occur in the course of employment, as he was off the employer's premises during his lunch break, traveling via transportation not furnished by the employer, at the time of the fatal accident.

Levi Simonds, a teamster employed by Jake Reigel to work on a highway construction project, was killed when he fell from a truck while riding into town during his lunch break. Simonds had climbed onto a loaded gravel truck at the pit location and rode it toward Deer River to eat lunch at home, a distance of approximately 4 miles from the work site. When the truck reached town, Simonds attempted to exit before it came to a complete stop and fell under the wheel.

The Industrial Commission denied Simonds's widow compensation under workers' compensation law. The court upheld this denial, finding that the injury did not arise out of or occur in the course of employment. During the lunch period from 10:30 a.m. to 1 p.m., Simonds's time was his own, and his employer exercised no control over him. The court reasoned that Simonds left the work site of his own volition using transportation the employer did not furnish, and the accident resulted from hazards common to street use rather than hazards inherent to his employment.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether an employee's injury during lunch break constitutes an injury arising out of and in the course of employment
Whether an employer's liability extends to accidents occurring while an employee travels to or from work during unpaid time
Whether the employer's provision or control of transportation affects workers' compensation eligibility

Procedural posture

The case came before the court on a petition for certiorari to review an order by the Industrial Commission denying workers' compensation benefits.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

Wilson, C. J.

The Superway Construction Company was graveling part of State Highway No. 8. They procured gravel from a pit 4 miles west of Deer river and caused it to be hauled in motor trucks for distribution. Jake Reigel owned a team and he employed Levi Simonds, a teamster, to take the team and work for the construction company for $6.50 per day. The pay was divided equally between Simonds and Reigel. Simonds cared for the team and used it in the pit under directions of the contractor’s foreman. He lived at Deer River. He boarded at home. He could- have boarded at the camp near or at the pit. His hours of work were from 5:30 a. m. to 10:30 a. m. and from 1 p. m. to 6 p. m.

On August 18, 1924, the several trucks used in the work were hauling gravel to a point east of Deer River. Simonds, with the silent acquiescence of the driver, climbed upon one of the trucks loaded! with gravel and rode into Deer River to have his lunch at home. It happened that this particular driver owned his truck and was working for the contractor. In getting off the truck in Deer River Simonds did not wait for it to stop and he fell under the wheel, receiving fatal injuries.

The order of the Industrial Commission denying compensation is before us on certiorari.

“Personal injuries arising out of and in the course of employment” do not. include injuries received by, an employe while off- and not about his employer’s premises and on his way to or from the place of employment, unless the employer regularly furnishes transportation to his employes to or from the place of employment, etc. Section 4326(j), G. S. 1923; Nesbitt v. Twin City Forge Co. 145 Minn. 286, 177 N. W. 131, 10 A. L. R. 165; Otto v. Duluth St. Ry. Co. 138 Minn. 312, 164 N. W. 1020; Erickson v. St. Paul City Ry. Co. 141 Minn. 166, 169 N. W. 532.

From 10:30 to 1 o’clock the decedent’s time was his own, except that he was to see to it that the team was fed and cared for. On the day in question, at his request, another man fed the team. At the time of the injury the employe was 4 miles from the place of his work where his presence was not required by his work. He did not suffer the injury during his hours of service but when the employer had no control over him. He had the same status as an employe before reaching his place of employment in the morning or after leaving it in the evening. Many employes at lunch time go upon the streets and are exposed to hazards which are not incident to their employment, but are incident to being upon the street and are common to all who use the street. Here the employe left his place of employment by means of his own selection over which the employer had no control. The operation of the truck and the conduct of deceased resulting in death were also beyond the control of the employer. The accident simply had no connection with the employment. McInerney v. B. & S. R. Corp. 225 N. Y. 130, 121 N. E. 806; Reed v. B. & V. A. Lbr. Co. 225 Mich. 164, 196 N. W. 420; Hills v. Blair, 182 Mich. 20, 148 N. W. 243. The employer did not furnish the transportation used. We see no theory upon which the facts may support an allowance of compensation under the law. The injury did not arise out of and. in the course of employment.

Affirmed.