Couch v. Greenville County

• Decision Date: 08 March 1967
• Docket Number: No. 18614,18614
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: Fred T. COUCH, Respondent, v. GREENVILLE COUNTY, and State Workmen's Compensation Fund, Appellants.

Page 394

153 S.E.2d 394

249 S.C. 186

Fred T. COUCH, Respondent, v. GREENVILLE COUNTY, and State Workmen's Compensation Fund, Appellants.

No. 18614.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

March 8, 1967.

Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod, Asst. Atty. Gen. David Aiken, Columbia, Robert S. Galloway, Jr., Greenville, for appellants.

Mann, Foster, Johnston & Ashmore, Greenville, for respondent.

LEWIS, Acting Chief Justice.

This is a Workmen's Compensation case and is here on appeal by the employer from an order of the Greenville County Court remanding the case to the Industrial Commission for further consideration of the issues and for findings thereon.

The claimant, a deputy sheriff for Greenville County at the time, with a prior history of heart disease, allegedly suffered an aggravation of his heart condition, with resulting total and permanent disability, when he became emotionally upset as a result of being called in by the sheriff and acquainted with certain complaints that had been made against him by citizens of the county. Claim was filed for benefits under the Workmen's Compensation Act and the employer defended upon the grounds that (1) notice of the alleged accident had not been given as required by Section 72--301 of the 1962 Code of Laws, (2) the claim was barred by a release previously signed by claimant, and (3) the claimant had not sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.

The Hearing Commissioner made an award to claimant for total and permanent disability, holding that (1) notice of the injury was given as required by law, and (2) the claimant suffered a heart attack 'while engaged in an investigation of a rape case.' No finding or ruling was made relative to the defense that the claim was barred by a release previously signed by the claimant.

The employer thereafter appealed to the Full Commission upon grounds which challenged the foregoing findings of the Hearing Commissioner, and also his failure to pass upon the effect of the release as a bar to the claim. The Full Commission affirmed the findings of the Hearing Commissioner as to the giving of notice of the alleged injury and also the award for total and permanent disability, but failed, as did the Hearing Commissioner, to pass upon the effect of the release previously signed by claimant. However, in affirming the award for total disability, the Full Commission, instead of basing it on the finding of the Hearing Commissioner that claimant suffered a heart attack 'while investigating a rape case,' 'amended' such finding by substituting the following:

'It is found as a fact that the employee-claimant employed by the defendant-employer as a deputy sheriff, suffered a heart attack after being reprimanded by his employer, causing a severe emotional disturbance to his well being, and that his condition of total disability was triggered by the actions of...