214 Mich. 235 | Mich. | 1921
This case is certiorari to the industrial accident board to review proceedings which led to an award of $4,200 to plaintiffs on account of the death of Elmer Bresee, husband and father of plaintiffs, in defendant’s manufacturing plant at Buchanan. It was shown to the committee of arbitration that Elmer Bresee was employed by defendant in its machine shop as an operator of a drill press. That while engaged in such work on December 19,1919, he stepped on a steel shaving which entered his foot near the little toe. He did not appear greatly concerned about it and worked until December 25th. On that day he became ill. From that time he rapidly grew worse and died on December 29th of tetanus. The committee of arbitration allowed plaintiffs a death award of $4,200. On appeal to the industrial accident board the award was affirmed.
Defendant has alleged numerous errors, but they are substantially all aimed at two propositions:
First. That there was no competent proof that Elmer Bresee received any injury in defendant’s shop arising out of and in the course of his employment.
Second. If he did receive such an injury as is claimed, it was not shown that he died from the effects of it.
“Nature and Cause of Injury — Claimant alleges stepping on steel shaving, cutting right, foot,”
and further stating that Dr. Curtis was the attending physician. Subsequently, Mr. Hathaway, the superintendent, made the final report to the industrial accident board. In this report it stated:
“Cause and Manner of Accident — -Stepped on steel shaving.
“Nature and Extent of Injury in Detail — Cut his. right foot.”
It was further shown that after the accident MrBresee limped and favored his injured foot. Much is. said by counsel concerning the hearsay evidence in. the record, as to the cause of the injury. There is,, undoubtedly, some hdarsay testimony in the record! bearing upon that question, but we think that if this be eliminated there is still sufficient competent evidence to make a prima facie case, that Mr. Bresee was injured as claimed while pursuing his duties in defendant’s shop. This court has held that, even though there be hearsay evidence in the testimony, we will not reverse the conclusion of the board for that reason where there is sufficient comjpetent evidence of the fact, to make a prima facie case. Reck v. Whittlesberger, 181 Mich. 463 (Ann. Cas. 1916C, 771); Fitzgerald v. Lozier Motor Co., 187 Mich. 660.
The award of the industrial accident board is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs.