Key v. Briar Hill Collieries

MR,. Justice Chambliss

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The amount of the award only is questioned on appeal by the company in this compensation case. It is insisted that the undisputed evidence shows that “the injury which petitioner received was confined to his foot and not to his leg, ’ ’ and that the court erred in allowing an award on the basis provided by the statute for loss of a leg. The “loss of the use of a member shall be considered as equivalent to the loss of that member.” Section 28, Public Acts of 1919, chapter 123.

Key, fifty-one years old, testified that, while helping to…