Crowley v. City of Lowell
| Decision Date | 04 March 1916 |
| Citation | 111 N.E. 786,223 Mass. 288 |
| Parties | CROWLEY v. CITY OF LOWELL. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Middlesex County.
Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act for compensation by Sarah A. Crowley, wife of the employé, against the City of Lowell, employer. From a decree of the superior court affirming the findings and decision of the Industrial Accident Board, the employer appeals. Affirmed.
J. Joseph Hennessy, of Lowell, for appellant.
John P. Farley and Edward J. Tierney, both of Lowell, for appellee.
The city contends that no causal connection between his injuries and the general condition of paresis rendering the employé insane, and requiring his commitment to an asylum, is shown by the record and therefore the decree should be reversed. McNicol's Case, 215 Mass. 497, 102 N. E. 697. But the material evidence before the committee on arbitration submitted without the introduction of further testimony to the Industrial Accident Board upon review, warranted the findings, that the employé had ‘a pre-existing constitutional disease known as syphilis' which being dormant left his ability to perform the arduous work for which he was hired unimpaired, and that because of the nature of the accident arising out of and in the course of employment, his nervous system suffered a shock sufficiently severe to aggravate and accelerate this condition, until general paralysis or insanity resulted depriving him of all capacity for work in the future. The statute prescribes no standard of fitness to which the employé must conform, and compensation is not based on any implied warranty of perfect health, or immunity from latent and unknown tendencies to disease, which may develop into positive ailments, if incited to activity through any cause originating in the performance of the work for which he is hired. What the Legislature might have said is one thing, what it has said is quite another thing, and in the application of the statute the cause or partial or total incapacity may spring from, and be attributable to the injury just as much where undeveloped and dangerous physical conditions are set in motion producing such result, as where it follows directly from dislocations; or dismemberments; or from internal organic changes capable of being exactly located. Madden's Case, 222 Mass. 487, 111 N. E. 379.
The findings having been justified are conclusive, and the requests were all...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Delille v. Holton-Seelye Co.
... ... Appeal ... from Circuit Court of City of St. Louis; Hon. Clyde C ... Beck, Judge ... ... Affirmed ... 533, 99 So. 430; Dickson Const. & Repair Co. v ... Beasley, 146 Md. 568, 126 A. 907; Crowley v. City of ... Lowell, 223 Mass. 288, 111 N.E. 786; Walker v. Minn ... Steel Co., 167 Minn. 475, ... ...
-
In re De Filippo
...years of exposure to the hazards of the trade. Madden's Case, 222 Mass. 487, 494, 497, 111 N. E. 379 L. R. A. 1916D, 1000; Crowley's Case, 223 Mass. 288, 111 N. E. 786;Cusick's Case, 260 Mass. 421, 157 N. E. 596;Fabrizio's Case, 274 Mass. 352, 354, 174 N. E. 720;Colantueno's Case, 275 Mass.......
-
In re Death of Larson
... ... 191, 150 N.E. 640; Pace v ... North Dakota, 51 N.D. 815, 201 N.W. 348; Crowley v ... City of Lowell, 223 Mass. 288, 111 N.E. 786; Knock ... v. Industrial Acc. Com., 200 Cal ... ...
-
Defilippo's Case
...because of the cumulative effect of years of exposure to the hazards of the trade. Madden's Case, 222 Mass. 487 , 494, 497. Crowley's Case, 223 Mass. 288 . Cusick's Case, 260 Mass. 421 . Fabrizio's Case, 274 Mass. 352, 354. Colantueno's Case, 275 Mass. 1 . Panagotopulos's Case, 276 Mass. 60......