Haddorf v. Jerauld County
| Decision Date | 04 May 1935 |
| Docket Number | 7763. |
| Citation | 260 N.W. 404,63 S.D. 448 |
| Parties | HADDORF v. JERAULD COUNTY et al. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jerauld County; R. C. Bakewell, Judge.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Carl A. Haddorf claimant, opposed by Jerauld County, employer, and the Western Surety Company, insurer. From a judgment awarding claimant compensation after denial of compensation by the industrial commissioner, the employer and the insurer appeal.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Tom Kirby, of Sioux Falls, for appellants.
Charles R. Hatch, of Wessington Springs, for respondent.
This is a proceeding brought under the Workmen's Compensation Law (Rev. Code 1919, § 9436 et seq., as amended) by Carl A Haddorf against Jerauld county, his employer, and the Western Surety Company, insurer. Haddorf sustained an injury to his left hand while in the employment of the county. The material and decisive inquiry is whether septicemia from which claimant suffered was caused by this injury. The industrial commissioner denied an award on the ground that disability was in fact due to a second accident and injury which did not occur in the course of employment.
On November 10, 1932, while engaged in laying a plank floor upon a highway bridge, Haddorf accidentally caught his left hand between a plank and another piece of timber. This occurred about 3 o'clock in the afternoon, but he continued to work the remainder of that day. The next day was a holiday, and no work was carried on. On Saturday, November 12, he was engaged in his usual work with the county. On the following Sunday morning while claimant was shoeing a horse for a neighbor, he again injured his left hand. On Monday he was unable to work because the injured hand pained him severely. Claimant was treated by Dr. Foster, his family physician, until November 21, when he was removed to a hospital, where he remained for treatment until December 24, 1932.
These proceedings were commenced on August 23, 1933, by the filing of a petition by claimant with the industrial commissioner. From an adverse decision of the commissioner, claimant appealed to the circuit court of Jerauld county. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were made by the court to the effect that the septicemia resulted from the injury on November 10, and judgment was entered accordingly.
Testimony was given before the industrial commissioner both by claimant and medical experts. Claimant testified that, when the bridge plank fell upon his left hand, he was wearing two pairs of mittens; that there was no abrasion of the skin, but his hand was sore; that he could not use a crowbar in loosening gravel by reason of the jar against his hand; that on Sunday morning, when he was shoeing a horse for a neighbor, he pinched his left hand between the hoof and leg of the horse; and that early Monday morning he felt a throbbing and severe pain in his hand, and at about 9 o'clock he consulted Dr. Foster, who attended him from time to time until the following Monday, when he was taken to a hospital. On cross-examination he testified: The hospital record contained this statement:
Dr Foster testified that he made an examination of claimant's hand on November 14, 1932; that there was a slight, swelling, but no abrasion of the skin; that the patient told him that he had a very severe pain in his hand; that at that time he found no "localized infection"; that an infection of the kind that he later found in claimant's fingers would take a longer time than twenty-four hours to develop. The doctor was asked this question: "Assuming that the plaintiff had his fingers...
To continue reading
Request your trial