Opinion
October 25, 1939.
November 15, 1939.
Workmen's compensation — Employment — Interstate and intrastate transportation — Car inspector in receiving yard of railroad — Duties inseparable — Predomination of interstate character — Burden of proof.
In a workmen's compensation case, in which the evidence supported findings that claimant, at the time of his injury, was employed by defendant railroad as a car inspector in a receiving yard, and that cars, traveling in interstate and intrastate transportation, indiscriminately mixed in arriving trains, were inspected by him as they came into the yard, preparatory to their classification and assembly into new trains, made up of cars going to the same destinations, for the purpose of seeing that they were in condition to continue their journey; it was held that claimant's duties were not separable between interstate and intrastate transportation, that the interstate character of the work predominated, that the burden of showing that he was not actually engaged in interstate transportation at the time he received his injury rested on the claimant, and that the evidence supported a finding of the compensation board that claimant had not met this burden.
Appeal, No. 179, Oct. T., 1939, from decree of C.P. Blair Co., Oct. T., 1938, No. 179, in case of Roy D. Riley v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company.
Before KELLER, P.J., CUNNINGHAM, BALDRIGE, STADTFELD, PARKER, RHODES and HIRT, JJ. Judgment affirmed.
Appeal by claimant from decision of Workmen's Compensation Board disallowing compensation.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Appeal dismissed, opinion by PATTERSON, P.J. Claimant appealed.
Errors assigned related to the action of the court below in entering a decree dismissing claimant's exceptions.
Mitchell MacCartney, of MacCartney Mullen, for appellant.
Robert F. Hare, with him Thomas C. Hare, and John J. Haberstroh, for appellee.
Argued October 25, 1939.
This case is ruled against the appellant by the decisions of this court in Sigler v. Pittsburgh Lake Erie Railroad, 127 Pa. Super. 458, 461, 193 A. 362, and Mason v. Reading Company, 129 Pa. Super. 289, 195 A. 754, in which Judge PARKER reviewed the relevant governing decisions of the United States Supreme Court.
The evidence in the record supports a finding that the claimant, at the time of his injury, was employed by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company as a car inspector in its eastbound receiving yard at Altoona; his duty was to inspect cars arriving there, preparatory to their classification in the yard and their assembly into new trains made up of cars going to the same destinations, for the purpose of seeing if they were in condition to continue their journey; that cars traveling in interstate and intrastate transportation, indiscriminately mixed in arriving trains, were inspected by him as they came into the yard in the average proportion of five interstate to one intrastate car.
His duties, therefore, were not separable between interstate and intrastate transportation. The inspection was deemed necessary for the safety of all cars and all trains, passenger and freight, moving over the defendant's railroad, which might be injured by transporting a defective car, and, under the foregoing decisions, the interstate character of the work predominated, and the burden of showing that he was not actually engaged in interstate transportation at the time he received his injury rested on the claimant.
The Workmen's Compensation Board held that he had not met this burden, and refused his claim for compensation. The evidence supported the board's findings of fact, and the legal conclusion properly followed the findings.
The judgment is affirmed.