Graves v. Burns, Lane & Richardson

• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: Per Curiam.
• Citation: Graves v. Burns, Lane & Richardson, 160 A. 399, 10 N.J.Misc. 667 (N.J. 1932)
• Decision Date: 16 May 1932
• Docket Number: 209
• Parties: THOMAS GRAVES, PROSECUTOR, v. BURNS, LANE & RICHARDSON, DEFENDANT

160 A. 399

GRAVES

v. BURNS, LANE & RICHARDSON.

No. 209.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

May 16, 1932.

Certiorari to Court of Common Pleas, Passaic County.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Thomas Graves, claimant, opposed by Burns, Lane & Richardson, employer. From a judgment reversing award of Workmen's Compensation Bureau for claimant, the employer brings certiorari.

Judgment of the court of common pleas reversed and award of Compensation Bureau affirmed.

Argued October term, 1931, before TRENCHARD and DONGES, JJ.

Arthur C. Dunn, of Paterson, for prosecutor.

Collins & Corbin, of Jersey City, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.

This certiorari brings up for review a judgment entered in the Passaic county court of common pleas reversing a judgment entered in the Workmen's Compensation Bureau on January 26, 1931. The facts are that Graves, the prosecutor, was employed as a journeyman plumber, and on November 18, 1929, was working for the defendant on a building at the North Jersey Training School for Women at Totowa. He reported for work and with a helper was carrying a 3-inch iron pipe from the place where it was stored up a hill about 150 feet to the building where they were working. It appears that this pipe weighed 160 to 165 pounds, was 22 feet in length, and 3 inches in diameter. The helper lifted the end up hill, and the petitioner endeavored to raise the lower end. As he did so be felt something "wrong inside." He suffered pain and grew dizzy. His condition was apparent to another helper who relieved him of the pipe and carried it in the cellar with the assistance of the man who started with Graves. Thereafter the prosecutor began to spit blood and continued to do so for several days. Finally he was obliged to give up work, and the doctors diagnosed his condition as tuberculosis, and said that the extraordinary strain bad induced activity in bacteria which had been dormant.

The sole question is whether the occurrence was an accident within the meaning of the statute. There is no question that it arose out of and in the course of the employment, and there is no doubt about, his condition.

The deputy commissioner found that the occurrence was an accident and awarded compensation. Appeal was taken to the court of common pleas where it was held that it was not an accident within the contemplation of the statute, and the finding of the Compensation Bureau was reversed.

This case is covered by the opinion of the Court of Errors and Appeals in Winter v. Atkinson-Frizelle Co., 88 N. J. Law, 401, 96 A. 360, where the common pleas court awarded...