Evans v. City and County of Denver, 22842
| Decision Date | 25 March 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 22842,22842 |
| Citation | 438 P.2d 698,165 Colo. 311 |
| Parties | Lillie M. EVANS, Plaintiff in Error, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER (a municipal corporation), State Compensation Fund, and Industrial Commission of Colorado, Defendants in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Robert Leland Johnson, Denver, for plaintiff in error.
Alious Rockett, Francis L. Bury, Feay Burton Smith, Jr., for defendants in error, City and County of Denver and State Compensation Fund.
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Atty. Gen., Peter L. Dye, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for Industrial Commission.
This is a writ of error brought by the widow of a deceased who died as a result of a heart attack which occurred in the course of his employment. The Industrial Commission denied compensation and its award was affirmed by the District Court.
The deceased was an employee of the City and County of Denver and worked for the Sanitary Services Department. He operated a Payloader or Scoopmobile and had worked a good deal of overtime during the period from June 16, 1965 to July 2, 1965 in clearing up debris from the flood which struck Denver in June of 1965.
He worked normal hours in the week of July 2, 1965 to July 9, 1965. In the early afternoon of July 9, 1965, the deceased collapsed on the job and died because of a myocardial infarction. On the morning of July 9, 1965, the deceased had helped a laborer remove a piece of plywood from the accumulated debris so that the Scoopmobile could proceed with its work. Testimony from the laborer who worked with the deceased was that deceased would often help the laborer move debris by hand when the occasion required.
Medical testimony developed that the deceased had had a previous heart attack some ten years earlier. Two doctors testified in the case, and their testimony was in conflict concerning the causal connection between the deceased's activity in his employment and his death.
On the basis of the facts recited above, the Commission found the deceased's activities, while arduous, did not constitute 'over-exertion' and that deceased's employment did not cause or contribute to his heart attack.
In Colorado, we are committed to the doctrine that in order to render a 'heart attack,' incurred in the course of employment, compensable under the Workmen's Compensation Act, the claimant must show (1) 'over-exertion' by the decedent, arising out of and in the course of his employment, and (2) that such 'o...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
T and T Loveland Chinchilla Ranch v. Bourn, 24275
...v. Phillips, 166 Colo. 312, 443 P.2d 379; Blood v. Industrial Comm., 165 Colo. 532, 440 P.2d 775 (1968); Evans v. City and County of Denver, 165 Colo. 311, 438 P.2d 698 (1968); Baca County School Dist. No. Re--6 v. Brown, 156 Colo. 562, 400 P.2d 663 (1965); Industrial Comm. v. Hesler, 149 C......
-
Beaudoin Const. Co. v. Industrial Commission, 80CA0292
...of the decedent" in his employment. Blood v. Industrial Commission, 165 Colo. 532, 440 P.2d 775 (1968); see Evans v. City & County of Denver, 165 Colo. 311, 438 P.2d 698 (1968); Baca County School District No. RE-6 v. Brown, 156 Colo. 562, 400 P.2d 663 (1965); Industrial Commission v. Inter......
-
City and County of Denver v. Industrial Commission
...160 N.E.2d 901. III. The determination of overexertion is a question of fact to be decided by the Commission. Evans v. City & County of Denver, 165 Colo. 311, 438 P.2d 698. Where conflicting inferences exist, the choice between them is left to the trier of fact, Archer Freight Lines, Inc. v......
-
Industrial Commission v. Riley
...course of employment, in order to show a causal connection between the employment and death or disability. E.g., Evans v. City & County of Denver, Colo., 438 P.2d 698; Industrial Commission of Colorado v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp., 132 Colo. 256, 287 P.2d 275. No such requirem......