Birmingham Electric Co. v. Meacham, 6 Div. 142

• Decision Date: 14 June 1937
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 142
• Citation: 234 Ala. 506,175 So. 322
• Parties: BIRMINGHAM ELECTRIC CO. v. MEACHAM.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

175 So. 322

234 Ala. 506

BIRMINGHAM ELECTRIC CO. v. MEACHAM.

6 Div. 142

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 14, 1937

Rehearing Denied June 29, 1937

Certiorari to Court of Appeals.

Petition of John Sharp Meacham for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in the case of Birmingham Electric Company v Meacham,175 So. 316, which began as a proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Law by petitioner.

Writ denied.

W.A Denson, of Birmingham, for petitioner.

J.P Mudd, of Birmingham, opposed.

KNIGHT Justice.

This cause is brought before the court by petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals, to review and revise the opinion and judgment of that court in the case of Birmingham Electric Company v. John Sharp Meacham,175 So. 316.

We concur in the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeals that the plaintiff's disability was not the result of an accident as defined by the Alabama Workmen's Compensation Act(Code 1923, § 7534 et seq.).But if it could be so held manifestly the action was barred by the statute of limitations.Code, § 7570.

However, we do not commit ourselves to all that is contained in the opinion of the Court of Appeals on the subject of "occupational disease."

In our recent case of Gentry v. Swann Chemical Company,174 So. 530, 533, this court, in an exhaustive opinion by Mr Justice Brown, dealt with the subject of what constituted "an occupational disease," and it was there pointed out that "The weight of authority and the best-considered cases, sustain the view that this rule of the common law is...