Greene v. Yeager

• Citation: 160 A.2d 605,222 Md. 411
• Decision Date: 16 May 1960
• Docket Number: No. 206,206
• Parties: Minna GREENE v. H. T. YEAGER, etc., et al.
• Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland

Page 411

222 Md. 411

160 A.2d 605

Minna GREENE v. H. T. YEAGER, etc., et al.

No. 206.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

May 16, 1960.

Albert H. Greene, Washington, D. C., for appellant.

John J. Pyne, Kensington (G. A. Chadwick, Jr., Boyds, on the brief), for appellees.

Before BRUNE, C. J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT and HORNEY, JJ.

PRESCOTT, Judge.

After the Circuit Court for Montgomery County found that the appellant-claimant had received no permanent partial disability as the result of her falling while she was engaged in her employer's business, she appealed.

The claimant, Minna Greene, was employed by Yeager's Dress Shop. On April 23, 1953, [the case was placed and remained upon the stet docket for some two years] while waiting on a customer, she stumbled backward when she reached behind her for some dresses and fell, and as a result thereof suffered a Colle's fracture of her left wrist. Thereafter, the State Industrial Accident Commission [Commission]--now the Workmen's Compensation Commission--passed an order that compensation at the rate of $31.75 per week be paid to her by H. T. Yeager, employer, and Hardware Mutual Insurance Company, insurer. She was classified as temporarily totally incapacitated as a result of said fall, and was paid compensation therefor until September 21, 1953.

A hearing was held by the Commission on the question of permanent disability on May 25, 1954, at the request of the claimant. The Commission found that she had sustained 'a permanent partial disability resulting in 15% loss of use of left hand,' as well as the temporary total disability for which she has been paid.

The case was submitted to the Circuit Court upon the record made before the Commission by stipulation of the parties. The record is comparatively short and consists of the testimony of the claimant, in her own behalf, and Dr. Everett J. Gordon, a specialist in orthopedic surgery, called by the employer and insurer. The trial court found that the claimant did not suffer any permanent disability as the result of her fall; consequently, that part of the order of the commission which awarded her compensation therefor was reversed. The sole question for our determination is the correctness, vel non, of the trial court's finding.

The appellant's whole attack upon this ruling is that the court 'erred when it found as a matter of law that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding by the Commission of permanent partial disability.' (Italics added.) It is true that the court did find that there was no evidence to support the finding of the Commission, but this was only a part of the court's findings of fact; and, in the then posture of the case, was totally unnecessary for its determination.

The case had been submitted to the court. Either side, of course, could have requested, before its submission, a jury trial to determine the questions of fact. Code (1959 Cum.Supp.), Article 101, Section 56(a). This section also states:

'* * * If the court shall determine that the Commission has acted within its powers and has correctly construed the law and facts, the decision of the Commission shall be confirmed; otherwise it shall be reversed or modified.' (Italics added.)

Neither side made a request for a jury trial; hence, the trial court was called upon to determine whether or not the Commission had, 'correctly construed the * * * facts' (special provision, however, is made for cases in which occupational diseases are involved by said section), giving due weight to the provision in sub-section (c) that the decision of the Commission...