
    DeRaya v. Illinois Steel Company.
    [No. 12,545.
    Filed February 18, 1926.]
    1. Master and Servant.—Under Workmen’s Compensation Act, a finding of the Industrial Board is conclusive on appeal if there was any evidence to sustain it.—Under §61 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (§9506 Burns 1926), the Industrial Board’s finding of facts, when sustained by any evidence, is binding on the Appellate Court, from which it follows that its finding that a claimant for compensation was not a dependent of a deceased employee is conclusive on appeal if there w'as any evidence to sustain such finding, p. 202.
    2. Master and Servant.—The Industrial Board has the same right as a court or jury to draw inferences from the facts and circumstances in evidence, p. 202.
    From the Industrial Board of Indiana.
    Application for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act by Theofila Ahalos DeRaya, widow of Antonio DeRaya, against the Illinois Steel Company, employer. From a finding of the Industrial Board that claimant was not a dependent of deceased, she appeals. Affirmed. By the court in banc.
    
      Seott & Capoueh, for appellant.
    
      Knapp & Campbell and J. L. Earlywine, for appellee.
   Thompson, J.

Appellant filed a claim for compensation against appellee under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and the Industrial Board found for appellee.

Among the facts found by the Industrial Board, and all that we need set out herein, is the following: “That the plaintiff herein is not shown to be dependent nor does the record show that the said Antonio De Raya left any dependents.”

Appellant earnestly contends that the finding of the board is not supported by the evidence. In determining this question this court is controlled by §61 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and under said section a finding of facts by the Industrial Board has the same force and effect as the finding of the trial court or the verdict of a jury, and when sustained by any competent evidence, is binding on this court. Bloomington, etc., Stone Co. v. Phillips (1917), 65 Ind. App. 189, 116 N. E. 850; Sugar Valley Coal Co. v. Drake (1917), 66 Ind. App. 152, 117 N. E. 987.

The Industrial Board heard the evidence in this case' and like a court or jury had a right to determine and draw inferences from the facts and circumstances in evidence. Haskell, etc., Car Co. v. Brown (1917), 67 Ind. App. 178, 117 N. E. 555.

Finding no error, the award is affirmed.  