237 N.W. 419 | Minn. | 1931
The commission assumed, without deciding, that the deceased was injured as claimed, but decided by a vote of two to one that such assumed injury did not cause the glioma or the death therefrom, and that it did not hasten the death by aggravating or inciting the glioma. The claim was that an injury to the head had produced the glioma, or, if not, it aggravated an existing glioma, which hastened the death.
The commission therefore determined the controlling fact against the relator and in favor of the employer. The record would have sustained a finding either way. We have repeatedly stated that the determination by the commission of controverted questions of fact must be sustained. We have at times said that the finding must stand unless it is manifestly contrary to the evidence. We are of the opinion however that the rule has been more aptly and modernly stated in this way: A finding upon a question of fact cannot be disturbed unless consideration of the evidence and the inferences permissible therefrom clearly require reasonable minds to adopt a conclusion contrary to the one at which the commission arrived. Krueger v. King Midas Mill. Co.
Our authorities upholding the general principle involved in this rule were collated in Walker v. Minnesota Steel Co.
Affirmed.
