(Download) "Tweedie v. Industrial Accident Board" by Supreme Court of Montana * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Tweedie v. Industrial Accident Board
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 22, 1936
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 67 KB
Description
Workmens Compensation ? Appeal to District Court and Supreme Court ? Manner of Review ? Death of Workman After Long Illness ? Cause of Death ? Proof to Moral Certainty not Required ? Preponderance of Evidence Sufficient ? Circumstantial Evidence ? Admission of Additional Testimony on Appeal to District Court ? When not Abuse of Discretion. Workmens Compensation ? Appeal to District Court ? When Permission to Introduce Additional Testimony not Abuse of Discretion. 1. Where a compensation claimant was not represented by counsel at the hearing of his case before the Industrial Accident Board, and the evidence there produced was so incomplete and confusing with respect to the necessary facts to be considered in arriving at an intelligent conclusion and the board after denying compensation had refused a rehearing, the district court on appeal held not to have abused its discretion in permitting the introduction of additional testimony, although much thereof was repetitious resulting in effect in a trial de novo. Same ? Appeal ? Review on Record of Industrial Accident Board ? Reception of Additional Testimony ? Review on Appeal to Supreme Court ? Rule. 2. Where the district court on appeal in a compensation case simply reviews it on the record made before the Industrial Accident Board - Page 257 or the additional testimony admitted by the court is unimportant, the decision of the board based on conflicting testimony must stand; but where the additional testimony demonstrates that the clear preponderance of the evidence is against the findings of the board and the court so finds, the supreme court will uphold its judgment even though the evidence before the board preponderated in favor of its decision. Same ? Appeal to Supreme Court ? When Resubmission of Case to Industrial Accident Board not Required. 3. Where the Industrial Accident Board denied claimant for compensation a rehearing asked for on the ground, among others, of newly discovered evidence, resulting in an appeal to the district court where additional evidence was properly admitted and judgment rendered in favor of claimant, the supreme court is not required, on the theory that claimant might well have presented his new evidence on the hearing before the board, to order resubmission of the case to the board instead of affirming the judgment of the district court, the latter court on appeal being vested with authority under section 2961, Revised Codes 1921, to render a proper judgment. Same ? Death of Injured Workman from Uremic Poisoning ? Cause of Death Held Traceable to Injury. 4. A coal miner was severely injured while working in a mine by a fall of rock in the latter part of 1929. He was never restored to capacity and received compensation until he died in the forepart of 1933 from uremic poisoning. The widow of deceased made application for compensation for his death, which was denied on the ground that the board was unable to find that his death was caused by accidental injury. Held, that the showing made by claimant on appeal in the district court was sufficient to justify the court in decreeing that the cause of the death was the injury. Same ? Cause of Death ? Proof to Moral Certainty not Required ? Preponderance of Evidence Sufficient ? Circumstantial Evidence. 5. To recover compensation for the death of an injured workman under the Workmens Compensation Act it is not necessary that the cause of the death be proved to a moral certainty; it is sufficient if it be proved by a preponderance of the evidence, and this proof may be made by circumstantial evidence.