Carroll v. Willow Brook Co. and Employers' Liability Assurance Corp

Decision Date17 April 1933
Docket Number319-1932
Citation108 Pa.Super. 580,165 A. 550
PartiesCarroll, Appellant, v. Willow Brook Co. and Employers' Liability Assurance Corp
CourtPennsylvania Superior Court

Argued March 14, 1933

Appeal by claimant from decree of C. P., Northampton County February T., 1932, No. 35, in the case of Margaret Carroll v Willow Brook Company and Employers' Liability Assurance Corporation.

Appeal from award of compensation to claimant by Workmen's Compensation Board. Before Stotz, J.

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

The court sustained the appeal and entered judgment for the defendant. Claimant appealed.

Error assigned, among others, was the entry of judgment.

Affirmed.

George W. Aubrey of Aubrey, Friedman and Senger, for appellant.

T. McKeen Chidsey of Chidsey, Maxwell & Frack, for appellee.

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

OPINION

Stadtfeld, J.

This is an appeal by claimant from the judgment of the court of common pleas of Northampton County, reversing the Workmen's Compensation Board, which affirmed the findings of fact, conclusions of law and award of the referee, under which compensation was awarded for the death of the decedent to his widow for herself and her minor daughter, and entering judgment in favor of defendants.

Carroll, the decedent, was a professional horse trainer and jockey, in the employ of the Willow Brook Company. On November 5, 1930, at about 2:15 P. M., he was seen riding one of the horses "Lady Blake", along the bridle path on the Willow Brook property. He was then engaged in the duties of his employment. He was not seen again by anyone, so far as the testimony discloses, until about an hour later, when he was found lying in a field of the defendant company, dead. The horse was discovered tied to a fence rail about eighty yards from the spot where the decedent's body lay. The horse's right front leg was broken. The saddle had been unbuckled and removed from the horse and was placed on the ground about fifteen feet away from the horse. The body of the decedent was lying to the west of the horse in the direction where the nearest telephone might be found, and also in the same line of direction where men were working in a field some distance away. On the bridle path, not far from where the horse was tied, was found a loose stone about two inches in diameter and the marks on the ground indicated that the horse had stumbled at this point. There was no ground or soil on the horse which would tend to show that the horse had fallen.

When the body was discovered, no sign of any external injury on the body was found, and a subsequent examination by the coroner's physician revealed none. Prior to the decedent's death he had for some years been in apparently good health, although he had suffered a gun-shot wound in his leg during the World War and was in the hospital for a period of fourteen months. He was compelled to undergo a bone and nerve grafting operation, and at the time of his death he was still receiving disability compensation on account thereof. An autopsy was performed by the deputy coroner, but the findings were negative, although the autopsy was not complete as to the head and chest; because of the widow's objection, the body was not exhumed.

The main question involved in this case is whether the claimant's husband, the decedent, died as the result of an accident while in the course of his employment, or from natural causes.

The court below found that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain either the referee's or the Board's conclusion that the decedent came to his death from an injury caused by an accident in the course of his employment.

Doctor Reichbaum, as deputy coroner, set down in the death certificate that the cause of death was a "fall from saddle horse, fractured skull, cerebral hemorrhage and brain contusion". He admitted, however, at the hearing, that the cause of death assigned by him in the death certificate was merely conjectural.

The referee found that there were no visible signs of injury upon decedent's body. A postmortem was performed upon the body of decedent by Dr. Reichbaum, deputy coroner. Decedent's stomach and intestines were examined by Dr. Reichbaum, also by Dr. Wilson of Lafayette Medical School, Easton, Pennsylvania. The head and chest of decedent were not posted due to the widow's failure to acquiesce. There was no evidence found by either Dr. Reichbaum or Dr. Wilson from their examination of the abdominal organs and cavity of decedent which would indicate a cause of death. Dr. Reichbaum testified decedent's death in his opinion was due to cerebral hemorrhage. He admitted, however, that there was not a scintilla of evidence that he fell from a horse, and he did not find any marks on the body when he examined it and that if you eliminate the fall from the horse, it would indicate that it was a natural death.

Dr. Earp, called by claimant, testified to the same effect as Dr. Reichbaum. His conclusion was based on the fact that the autopsy revealed no natural cause of death, and without the evidence of a natural cause of death, and the fact that the man was in good condition before his death, he "would be inclined to favor an accidental cause of death."

Dr Correll, surgeon in chief at the Easton Hospital, called in behalf of defendant, testified that there could not have been a fall...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Rossa ex rel. Rossa v. WCAB
    • United States
    • Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
    • 17 Octubre 2001
    ...that, despite the passage of years, blood or tissue samples would be available for testing. Id. I note that, in Carroll v. Willow Brook Co., 108 Pa.Super. 580, 165 A. 550 (1933), a widow sought workers' compensation for herself and her minor daughter following the death of her husband. The ......
  • Reed v. Horn's Motor Express, Inc.
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • 30 Septiembre 1936
    ...McAleer v. McMurray, 58 Pa. 126; Philadelphia City P. R. Co. v. Henrice, 92 Pa. 431, 439, 37 Am.Rcp. 699; Carroll v. Willow Brook Co., 108 Pa.Super. 580, 165 A. 2 Forum of the Dickinson School of Law, March, 1906, vol. 10, p. 123. --------------- ...
  • Lackner v. Pierre, Inc.,
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • 11 Diciembre 1935
    ... ... 82, 119 ... A. 832, nor Carroll v. Willow Brook Co., 108 ... Pa.Super. 580, 165 ... ...
  • Lichvan v. Jamison Coal Corp.
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • 10 Julio 1936
    ...Yeagle, 107 Pa.Super. 409, 164 A. 82; Weissman v. Philadelphia Electric Co, 111 Pa.Super. 353, 170 A. 318; Carroll v. Willow Brook Co, 108 Pa.Super. 580, 165 A. In all of the cases relied on by the appellant, the fact-finding body, that is, the board, or the referee and the board, had made ......
  • 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