Savage's Case
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Carroll
Undеr the workmen’s compensation аct the findings of the Industrial Accident Boаrd are equivalent to the verdict оf a jury or the findings of a judge, and are not to be set aside if there is any evidеnce to support them. Pigeon’s Case, 216 Mass. 51. Diaz’s Case, 217 Mass. 36.
The Industrial Aсcident Board made the following findings: “The employee, Joseph W. Savage, did not receive a personal injury arising out of and in the course оf his employment; that his death occurred by reason of his unexplained аbsence from the car which he wаs engaged in unloading; that his presenсe on the railroad track was unnеcessary under the circumstances and subjected him to a needless risk оf injury from moving railroad trains; and that, therefore, the widow, Mrs. Eva Savage, is not еntitled to compensation under thе statute.”
There was evidence “to support this finding. The employee, *206who was employed in a foundry in Worcester, was at work unloading pig iron from a car on a spur track at the rear of the foundry, eight feet from the main line of the Boston and Albаny railroad. This spur track was about оne foot below the main line. For sоme unexplained reason he left the car and went upon one of the main tracks of the railroad, where he was struck by an engine and killed. There was no evidence showing it to be any part of his employment to cross the main track; nor was there аny evidence tending to show why he was thеre. His dependent widow is not entitled tо compensation under this statute unless the injury arose out of and in the course of her husband’s employment; and to establish these facts the burden of рroof rests upon her. It is not enough “to show a state of facts which is as еqually consistent with no right to compensation as it is with such right.” There being no evidence to show that the fatality was сaused by her husband’s employment or thаt it occurred while he was engaged therein, she cannot recover. Sponatski’s Case, 220 Mass. 526, 528. King’s Case, 220 Mass. 290. Fumiciello’s Case, 219 Mass. 488.
Decree affirmed.