## Facts

- The City of Albia, Iowa employed Gust Johnson as the engineer in charge of the city’s water-pumping plant for about seven years.
- On November 15, 1923, Johnson told the city’s waterworks committee that he would quit that night, and the committee arranged for Seibert to take over the job.
- Johnson worked until about 7:15 p.m. on November 15, left the plant, and surrendered his key.
- Johnson had already vacated the city-provided residence near the plant and moved his family to another home in town.
- Johnson left personal property on city-owned premises, including a cow, a portable garage, a car, and his personal tools (which were also the tools needed to operate the plant and were the only ones then available).
- Without the city’s knowledge, Johnson returned to the plant around 8:00 a.m. on November 16 to retrieve his tools and to begin preparing to remove the rest of his personal property.
- At the plant, Seibert could not start one of the pumps because of a defective valve and asked Johnson for help.
- While attempting to assist Seibert in starting the pump, Johnson became caught in the machinery and lost his left arm.
- Johnson sought benefits under the Iowa Workmen’s Compensation Act; the industrial commissioner awarded compensation, and the district court affirmed the award before the city appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether Johnson was an “employee” under the Iowa Workmen’s Compensation Act at the time of the November 16 injury, given that he had quit and surrendered control of the plant the prior evening.
2. Whether Johnson’s return to the premises to retrieve his own property, combined with his voluntary assistance to the new engineer, created a continuing or renewed employment relationship through authorization, custom, implied agreement, or emergency.
3. Whether, on largely undisputed facts, the existence of covered employment status under the Act was a legal question reviewable by the court rather than a factual finding insulated by deference to the industrial commissioner.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the district court and set aside the compensation award.
- The court held Johnson was not an employee within the meaning of the Act when he was injured on November 16.
- The court concluded Johnson returned to the plant for private reasons (recovering tools and arranging removal of personal property), and the city had not authorized his return or his assistance.
- The court rejected coverage based solely on Seibert’s request for help, absent proof of an ongoing duty, an express or implied agreement, or an established custom extending the employment relation after termination.
- The court treated the statutory coverage question on undisputed facts as a matter for judicial determination.

## Legal Principles

- Workers’ compensation coverage depends on an existing employment relationship; once employment is terminated, later injuries are not compensable unless a continuing or renewed contract of hire (or duty tied to the prior job) is shown.
- Returning to the former employer’s premises for private purposes, such as collecting personal property, is not “in the course of employment.”
- A claimant must show employer authorization, an express or implied arrangement to perform further work, or a well-established custom that continues duties after discharge; without such proof, post-quit assistance is treated as gratuitous.
- A co-worker’s request for help, standing alone and without employer direction or ratification, does not re-create employee status under the Act.
- Where the operative facts are not materially disputed, whether those facts meet the statute’s definition of covered employment is a reviewable question of law (or at least not a pure fact question binding on the court).

## Conclusion

Because Johnson had ended his employment on November 15, returned on November 16 primarily to retrieve his own tools and arrange removal of his personal property, and lacked city authorization or proof of a continuing duty by contract or custom, the Iowa Supreme Court held he was not an employee under the Workmen’s Compensation Act when injured and reversed the compensation award.


Johnson v. City of Albia, 212 N.W. 419 (1927)