Plaintiff in error filed a claim with the industrial commission of Georgia, asserting the right to recover compensation on account of the death of his son, who died from injuries received at a planing mill where he was employed as a yardman on the night shift. The casе was originally heard by one of the commissioners, whо rendered a decision in favor of the plaintiff in error. An appeal to the full commission was taken, and upon this hearing the judgment awarding damages was reversed and compensation denied. A part оf the finding of the commission is a§ follows: “It appeаrs from the record in this ease that Albert Jackson was not on duty at the time of this accident, but had gone to the place of business of his employer sevеral hours prior to the time the night shift began work. He was duе to go to work at six o’clock, and just what time he arrived at the mill is problematical, but it was agreed by all parties at interest that the accident oсcurred at four o’clock. It would, therefore, appear that Albert Jackson arrived at leаst two hours prior to the time when he should have begun wоrk on the night shift. There was some evidence to. the effect that these night employees sometimes went to the mill early and were given extra work. In this partiсular ease, however, it is not the belief of the industrial commission that here was constituted a condition which would bring Jackson under the workmen’s compensation act. The industrial commission is thoroughly committed tо the principle that a reasonable time must ensue after an employee reaches аn employer’s
No specific question of law was raised in the appeal to the suрerior court. The commission passed upon the controlling questions of fact in the case; their finding is supported by ample evidence and was approved b}r the superior court, and this court will not interfere. Ga. Casualty Co. v. Martin, 157 Ga. 909 (
Judgment affirmed.