Clausen v. Department of Labor & Industries

(dissenting) — The judgment should be affirmed. Clearly, Clausen was a “workman” under the workmen’s compensation act. He was either an employee of the county or he was working under a contract. In either case, he was under the act. Whether he was paid in money or money’s worth is not material; whether paid in wood or in cash did not change the relationship. See Garney v. Department of Labor & Industries, 180 Wash. 645, 41 P. (2d) 400; Fitzgerald v. Department of Labor & Industries, 181 Wash. 325, 42 P. (2d) 805, and Blake v. Department of Labor & Industries, 196 Wash. 681, 84 P. (2d) 365.

If…