Cishowski v. Clayton Mfg. Co.

• Decision Date: 05 March 1927
• Citation: 105 Conn. 651,136 A. 472
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: CISHOWSKI v. CLAYTON MFG. CO. ET AL.

136 A. 472

105 Conn. 651

CISHOWSKI v. CLAYTON MFG. CO. ET AL.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

March 5, 1927

Appeal from Superior Court, Hartford County; Leonard J. Nickerson Judge.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Stephen Cishowski, opposed by the Clayton Manufacturing Company employer, and others. The compensation commissioner awarded the employee compensation, which award the superior court affirmed, dismissing the employer's appeal, and the employer and another again appeal. No error.

Samuel Reich, of Bridgeport, for appellants.

Saul P. Waskowitz, of Hartford, for appellee.

Argued before WHEELER, C.J., and MALTBIE, HAINES, HINMAN, and BANKS JJ.

HAINES, J.

The finding made by the commissioner discloses that the claimant came to this country from Poland in 1913 in good health, and entered the employ of the respondent as a grinder, and remained continuously in that employment till 1926, when the disability occurred. His work was the grinding of cast steel scissors, which were held against a revolving wheel, either of wood or leather with an emery rim, or of solid carborundum. Claimant sat near this wheel, which revolved at high speed away from the operator, and pressed the scissors against this revolving wheel. The result was that particles of emery, carborundum, and steel were thrown into the air, chiefly in the form of dust. Carborundum and emery contain silica, which is not soluble in lung moisture. For the purpose of removing this dust from the air, the respondent had installed a blower system, and a tin hood covered about one half the wheel, but left the other half on the side next the operator exposed in order that the scissors could be applied to the wheel. This blower system was inadequate to carry off all the dust, and some was thrown upon the claimant, entering his eyes, ears, nose, and mouth and finding lodgment in his lungs. The walls of the room were streaked with the dirt thrown from these revolving wheels. The floor was covered with dust, and dust was on and about the machine which the claimant operated. A sharp metal device was used about once in a half hour to take off the particles of steel, so the wheel would work more effectively. While this process, known as " " dressing down," was going on, a vast quantity of dust was stirred up so that the workman stood back while it was being done. As a consequence of this employment the claimant inhaled large quantities of dust. This dust, containing silica and other particles, had an injurious effect upon his lungs, as each particle caused a slight wound which, upon healing, left scarred tissue, causing a contraction, lessening the capacity of the lungs for inhalation, and otherwise interfering with their normal operation and natural capacity to resist disease. This produced pneumoconiosis, a disease not contagious, communicable, or mental in its nature. The disease thus produced broke down the normal resistance of the lungs, and tuberculosis set in as a direct result of the inability to resist the tubercle bacilli. There was thus an unbroken causation between the condition of the employment and the tuberculosis from which the claimant now suffers. By reason of the conditions indicated the claimant began to feel ill in September, 1925, and gradually grew worse. The commissioner held that by reason of the pneumoconiosis, with the resulting tubercular infection, the claimant had been totally disabled for any kind of work since May 15, 1926, and that this disability will continue indefinitely and with an unfavorable prognosis. The commissioner concluded that the claimant had suffered a personal injury which arose out of and in the course of his employment and awarded him compensation.

The appeal attacks the finding in numerous particulars, asking that many paragraphs be stricken out and other paragraphs added, and also attacks the soundness of the commissioner's conclusion as being inconsistent with the subordinate facts. All the evidence taken before the commissioner has been certified and is before us for examination. The paragraphs which the respondent seeks to have stricken out as having been found without evidence relate to the above summarized facts as to the adequacy of the blower system to carry off the dust; to the deposit of dust upon the wheel and floor of the room and upon the person of the claimant and its entrance into his eyes, ears, nose, mouth and lungs; the method and effect of " dressing down" the grinding wheel; the insolubility of some of the contents of the dust in the lungs and the effect upon the lungs and their functioning and loss of resistance to the tubercle bacilli. ...