(2) To allow the employer to furnish prompt medical treatment to prevent or minimize the disability from the injury. City of Ardmore v. Wickware, Okla., 297 P.2d 1088 (1956); Capitol Steel and Iron Co. v. Austin, supra. Claimant first argues that the statutorily required notice was given within 30 days after he discovered his injuries were caused by the June 15, 1972 accident, in accordance with the findings of the Court en banc. Second, claimant argues that if no notice was given, claimant was excused since there was no prejudice to the employer or insurance carrier, in accordance with the findings of the trial court.
"The law is settled that a foreman's or overseer's knowledge of an accident or injury constitutes the knowledge of the employer so as to dispense with a formal notice. City of Ardmore v. Wickware, Okla., 297 P.2d 1088."
Many cases hold such notice to be one giving the employer information within the statutory period of time as would have been obtained by him had the claimant given the statutory written notice, thereby enabling the employer to seek out the witnesses who might have had knowledge of claimant's injury and the attending circumstances. City of Ardmore v. Wickware, Okla., 297 P.2d 1088; Hamilton v. Midwestern Instruments, Inc., Okla., 371 P.2d 484, and other cases cited in 85 O.S.A., Sec. 24 [ 85-24], note 12. Herein the evidence was sufficient to sustain the finding of the State Industrial Court that petitioner had notice of claimant's injury. It is quite clear from the evidence that both Fisher and McInnes knew the job which claimant had been working on, and the location of the property, and that the statements made to them by claimant, as testified to by claimant, sufficiently described the injury, although claimant perhaps at the time did not know exactly the extent of the injury. The notice given by claimant was a sufficient compliance with the rule heretofore announced by this court.
The law is settled that a foreman's or overseer's knowledge of an accident or injury constitutes the knowledge of the employer so as to dispense with a formal notice. City of Ardmore v. Wickware, Okla., 297 P.2d 1088. We are unable to agree with the employer's argument that: (a) the testimony is insufficient to show notice to the lead lady within 30 days after accident; and (b) the lead lady did not learn from claimant that her injury to the neck and shoulder was "sustained while working."
The State Industrial Commission found that the employer had actual notice and was not prejudiced by a failure to give the statutory written notice. We have considered the excusing of the giving of the statutory written notice in the following cases: Jones v. Oliver, 204 Okla. 164, 228 P.2d 173; Nelson Electric Mfg. Co. v. Cartwright, Okla., 277 P.2d 163, and City of Ardmore v. Wickware, Okla., 297 P.2d 1088. It is not necessary to make a finding as to actual notice in order to excuse the giving of the statutory written notice. Jones v. Oliver, supra; Nelson Electric Mfg. Co. v. Cartwright, supra; and Massachusetts Bonding Ins. Co. v. Welch, 195 Okla. 636, 159 P.2d 1017.
If there has been no actual notice or knowledge within the said thirty day period, the statutory written notice may be excused (1) on the ground that for some reason it could not be given; or (2) on the ground that the employer or insurance carrier, as the case may be, has not been prejudiced by a failure to give the statutory written notice. City of Ardmore v. Wickware, Okla., 297 P.2d 1088; Jones v. Oliver, 204 Okla. 164, 228 P.2d 173. We think it unnecessary to determine whether the evidence reviewed above is sufficient to sustain the finding that the employer had actual notice or knowledge.