Bracken v. Bethlehem Steel Co.

Decision Date17 December 1934
Docket Number272-1934
PartiesBracken v. Bethlehem Steel Company, Appellant
CourtPennsylvania Superior Court

Argued April 16, 1934

Appeal by defendant from judgment of C. P., Cambria County, June T. 1933, No. 71, in the case of Bertha Bracken v. Bethlehem Steel Company.

Appeal from award of compensation by Workmen's Compensation Board. Before McCann, P. J.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

Appeal dismissed and judgment entered for claimant. Defendant appealed.

Error assigned, among others, was judgment.

Affirmed.

Francis A. Dunn, for appellant.

Peter P. Jurchak, for appellee.

Before Trexler, P. J., Keller, Stadtfeld, Parker and James, JJ.

OPINION

James, J.

Bertha Bracken, widow of Harry C. Bracken, filed her claim for compensation against the Bethlehem Steel Co., his employer. The referee disallowed the claim but upon appeal was reversed by the compensation board with directions to make further investigation. After further testimony was taken, the referee awarded compensation which award was affirmed by the board and by the court of common pleas.

Harry C. Bracken was employed at defendant's plant as a screen-man at a place where he worked alone. His duties as a screen-man were confined to operating levers of a coke chute at the bottom of which on each side was a trap door operated by a lever. The lever was about two and a half feet long with a one foot handle, which when pulled allowed the coke to come down into the bins.

On the morning of April 23, 1930, in his usual good health, he left for his work accompanied by his son, William. At about 3:15 P. M. on his way from his work he punched the time clock at the office or gate, where he met his son. They left the plant together to board the street car several hundred yards from the gate. After they boarded the street car, decedent complained to his son of pain on the left side of his back and that he had hurt himself by bumping his back against the gate-rest while pulling the lever. Not being able to walk from the end of the street car line to his home, decedent stopped at the home of his sister-in-law, Mrs. Rankin, to whom he told the story of the accident and indicated on his back where he received the injury, and she testified that she could feel a big lump and that on the following day at the home of the deceased she looked at his back and saw the lump. Defendant's son testified that he saw a lump on the left side of his back above the hip on the evening of the alleged accident. Decedent's widow testified that when he arrived home, the deceased appeared to be physically ill; she examined him and found a lump described as "a pretty good handful," which began to change color on the third day after the accident. Other witnesses testified as to declarations made by decedent as to the cause of the injury. On April 24th, Dr. Sobel was called to attend decedent and he later called Dr. Boyer, who found the decedent suffering from cellulitis. On April 25th, Dr Replogle, a surgeon for the defendant company, called on the decedent at his home. Decedent received medical attention at his home until April 30th, when he was taken to the Cambria Hospital where he died on May 2, 1930. Dr. J. B. Lowman, who was the chief physician at the hospital, testified that when the patient was admitted to the hospital, he was suffering from cellulitis in a very advanced stage of the left chest and back; that cellulitis is an infection of the cellular tissues under the skin; and a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Jacobs v. Buhl
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1937
    ...prove the precise cause which produced the injury.’ Bean's Case, 227 Mass. 558, 116 N.E. 826.' Also; in Bracken v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 115 Pa.Super. 251, 255, 175 A. 643, 644, as follows: ‘The circumstances independent of the hearsay testimony from which the referee could have found that d......
  • Jacobs v. Village of Buhl, 31145.
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1937
    ...prove the precise cause which produced the injury.' Bean's Case, 227 Mass. 558, 116 N.E. 826." Also; in Bracken v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 115 Pa.Super. 251, 255, 175 A. 643, 644, as "The circumstances independent of the hearsay testimony from which the referee could have found that decedent h......
  • Broad Street Trust Co. v. Heyl Brothers
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • July 15, 1937
    ... ... 206, 142 A. 208; Johnston ... v. Payne-Yost Const. Co., 292 Pa. 509, 141 A. 481; ... Bracken v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 115 Pa.Super. 251, ... 175 A. 643; Tomczak v. Susquehanna Coal Co., 250 ... ...
  • Lambing v. Consolidation Coal Co.
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • July 17, 1947
    ... ... 393; Johnston v ... Payne-Yost Construction Co., 292 Pa. 509, 141 A. 481; ... Bracken v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 115 Pa.Super. 251, ... 175 A. 643 ... The ... defendant ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT