For the prosecutor, Carpenter, Gilmour & Dwyer (Patrick A. Dwyer and James P. Beggans).
For the defendant, Max Atran.
Before Justice Case, Donges and Porter.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
DONGES, J. The writ of certiorari brings up a determination of the Hudson County Court of Common Pleas in a workmen's compensation case. The single question involved is whether the petitioner's employment was casual.
R.S. 34:15-36 defines an employee entitled to the benefit of the act as follows:
"Employee is synonymous with servant, and includes all natural persons who perform services for another for financial consideration, exclusive of casual employments, which shall be defined, if in connection with the employer's business, as employment the occasion for which arises by chance or is purely accidental; or if not in connection with any business of the employer, as employment not regular, periodic or recurring."
Obviously, in the instant case, petitioner was engaged in the employer's business. Did the employment occur by chance or purely by accident within the meaning of the statute?
The facts found by Judge Eastmead are supported by the testimony, and are as follows:
"The respondent-appellee was admittedly engaged in the business of manufacturing and installation of bowling alleys. On or about October 27th, 1942, he was moving bowling alley parts and equipment from Stanley's Alleys to the Bayonne Elks Club for installation at the latter place.
" Petitioner-appellant testifies he was hired by the ...