Franko v. Mack Mfg. Corp...

• Decision Date: 08 September 1949
• Docket Number: No. A-398.,A-398.
• Citation: 68 A.2d 267
• Parties: FRANKO v. MACK MFG. CORPORATION.
• Court: New Jersey Superior Court

68 A.2d 267

FRANKO

v.MACK MFG. CORPORATION.

No. A-398.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued July 26, 1949.

Decided Sept. 8, 1949.

Joseph Franko, who suffered a heart attack in the course of his employment, brought a proceeding for workmen's compensation, opposed by his employer, the Mack Manufacturing Corporation.

The Middlesex County Court, Law Division, 64 A.2d 657, affirmed the award of the Workmen's Compensation Bureau, and the employer appealed.

The Superior Court, Appellate Division, Davidson, J.A.D., reversed the judgment, holding that the employee failed to establish that his heart attack was caused by unusual strain or exertion arising out of his employment and beyond the mere employment itself.

Before Judges JAYNE, DAVIDSON, and WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, Jr. George F. Lahey, Jr., Newark, argued the cause for appellant (Lahey & Gockeler, Newark, attorneys).

Heston N. Potts, New Brunswick, argued the cause for defendant.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

DAVIDSON, J.S.C.

This is an appeal from the determination and judgment of the Middlesex County Court affirming the award of the Workmen's Compensation Bureau in a ‘heart case’. The essential facts are not greatly in dispute and the sole question for determination is whether petitioner suffered a compensable injury by virtue of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.

Petitioner, Joseph Franko, 64 years of age, had been employed as a hand reamer by respondent, Mack Manufacturing Company, for a period of 8 years and 3 months prior to January 9, 1948, the date of his injury. His work was a precision operation involving fine tolerances, for he customarily reamed or cut from 1 1/2 to 4 thousandths of an inch of steel from the inner circumference of bores in steel castings. These castings, also referred to as cases, weighed approximately 200 pounds and the 7 1/8 inch diameter hand reamer used by petitioner weighted 15 to 18 pounds and was 22 to 24 inches in length. A bar was inserted at right angles to and through the handle of the reamer which was revolved by hand pressure, and the steel extracted in truing the bore appeared in the form of powder or light, fine chips. The castings were deposited on the floor near petitioner's work bench, which was about 30 inches high, and lifted to a fixture on the bench by means of a chain and pulley suspended from an overhead crane.

Petitioner testified that on the day of the alleged accident he started work at the regular hour of eight o'clock, apparently on an unfinished job already on the work bench. After its completion, which consumed about an hour, he put the casting on the floor and hoisted a second, which was a ‘welded’ or ‘repair’ casting, to the bench with the pulley and chain block. He testified that the casting had been deposited 4 or 5 feet from the hoist and that he had rolled it into proper position before lifting it to the bench, although this fact is in dispute. The bore of the welded casting was out of round from 1 1/2 to 2 one-thousandths of an inch, and while turning the hand reamer petitioner felt pain in his heart and collapsed about ten o'clock. He was hospitalized and the medical testimony is in agreement that his condition was one of coronary insufficiency-a loss of blood to the heart muscle resulting from arteriosclerotic heart disease; he continues totally disabled and unable to undertake exertion.

An accidental injury to the heart, arising out of and in the course of employment, is a compensable accident within the meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Act, R.S. 34:15-1 et seq., N.J.S.A., and the law is now well settled, particularly as a result of two recent decisions, Grassgreen v. Ridgeley Sportswear Mfg. Co., 2 N.J.Super. 62, 64 A.2d 617 (App.Div. 1949) and Seiken v. Todd Dry Dock, Inc., 2 N.J. 469, 67 A.2d 131 (1949) which correlate and distinguish prior heart cases, wherein it was held that in order to rebut the presumption that a heart ailment is due to natural causes, it is incumbent upon the claimant to produce evidence of an unusual strain or exertion beyond the mere employment itself to constitute an ‘accident’ within the meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Law.

In Lohndorf v. Peper Bros....