Hardin's Bakeries v. Dependent of Harrell

• Decision Date: 05 September 1990
• Docket Number: No. 07-CC-58852,07-CC-58852
• Citation: 566 So.2d 1261
• Parties: HARDIN'S BAKERIES and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. DEPENDENT of Leonard T. HARRELL, Deceased.
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Page 1261

566 So.2d 1261

HARDIN'S BAKERIES and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. DEPENDENT of Leonard T. HARRELL, Deceased.

No. 07-CC-58852.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Sept. 5, 1990.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 26, 1990.

Suzanne N. Saunders, Saunders Abel & Fortenberry, Jackson, for appellant.

Rex F. Sanderson; J. Winston Brown, Houston, for appellee.

Before DAN M. LEE, P.J., and PRATHER and ROBERTSON, JJ.

I. INTRODUCTION

PRATHER, Justice, for the Court:

This is a workers' compensation case involving the award of death benefits to the spouse of Leonard T. Harrell, who died of a heart attack allegedly arising out of, and in the course of, his employment with Hardin's Bakeries. The Workers' Compensation Commission apportioned the award on the basis of pre-existing health conditions but, on appeal, the Scott County Circuit Court rejected the apportionment and awarded Leonard's widow full benefits. The circuit court's decision was appealed to this Court.

The award of benefits is affirmed; the circuit court's award of full benefits is reversed; and the Commission's apportionment determination, which was supported by substantial evidence, is reinstated.

A. Factual Background

On May 31, 1983, 54-year-old Leonard T. Harrell was in Morton, Mississippi, delivering bread for Hardin's Bakeries when he began to experience chest pain. Leonard was first taken to West Scott Baptist Hospital in Morton and then transferred to St. Dominic Hospital in Jackson where the "admitting diagnosis" was "unstable angina, rule out recent myocardial infarction." ¹ Tests performed at St. Dominic indicated that the pain he was experiencing was not in fact a heart attack. A chest x-ray did, however, reveal lesions on Leonard's lung. About a week later, Dr. David Westbrook, a pulmonary specialist, performed a stressful bronchoscopy ² on Leonard to determine whether the lesions were cancerous. Less than thirty minutes after the bronchoscopy was performed, Leonard "went into cardiac arrest" and died. The final diagnoses were listed in the following order: (1) cardiac arrest, (2) myocardial infarction, and (3) arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Leonard's widow subsequently filed a motion to controvert with the Mississippi Workers' Compensation Commission--alleging that her husband's death arose out of, and in the course of, his employment. An administrative judge held a hearing.

The evidence revealed various "risk factors" which made Leonard a likely candidate for heart disease and heart attack. For example, Leonard had smoked three packs of cigarettes daily since his teen-aged years and consumed approximately "one-half bottle of alcohol" daily for an unspecified number of years. His family had a history of heart-related problems; a brother died of a heart attack and another brother underwent heart surgery at the age of forty.

The evidence also revealed that Leonard had been employed by Hardin's for twenty-five years, and his responsibilities entailed daily delivery of bread commencing at 4:00 a.m. and concluding at 3:30 p.m. He was constantly "in and out" of his delivery truck carrying trays of bread which were deemed "not heavy" by one witness. Another witness described the work as "tiring" but not laborious; that is, Leonard did not have to do such tasks as loading the truck at the beginning of each work day, and his truck was equipped with a dolly which was supposed to be used for transporting the trays of bread.

Dr. Howard Clark, a general practitioner of medicine with some emphasis on coronary care, initially treated Leonard upon admission to West Scott Hospital. Clark testified that, based on evidence obtained from an electrocardiogram and other sources, he "thought" that Leonard was an "acute cardiac patient"; he subsequently administered medication and other treatment as though Leonard had just had a heart attack or was about to have a heart attack. Clark additionally testified that "[p]hysical exertion would have caused this situation [and Leonard] told me he was at work."

Dr. Thomas Paine, a board-certified cardiologist who treated Leonard at St. Dominic Hospital, testified that "lifting, fatigue, and work ... are thought to be contributing factors in having angina in someone with known coronary [heart] disease."

Dr. William Rosenblatt, a specialist in cardiovascular disease, did not personally examine Leonard but did review his medical records. Rosenblatt testified that a correlation between the heart attack and work stress could exist. Rosenblatt added that pre-existing conditions and the bronchoscopy were probably responsible for Leonard's death.

Dr. David Westbrook, testified that Leonard's "strong family history of heart disease and his strong smoking history" were factors to which his death may have been attributable. Westbrook added that he could not "state with certainty what Leonard died from."

At the conclusion of the hearing, the administrative judge awarded death benefits and apportioned (reduced) the award by one-third on the basis of pre-existing or non-work-related conditions. Hardin's Bakeries and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Hardin's liability insurer) appealed the judge's decision to the Workers' Compensation Commission, which affirmed the award of benefits but increased the apportionment to two-thirds. The Commission's decision was appealed to the Scott County Circuit Court, which affirmed the award of benefits, reversed the apportionment, and awarded full benefits to Leonard's widow. Finally, the circuit court's decision was appealed to this Court.

B. The Issues

Hardin's and Liberty Mutual presented numerous issues which have been consolidated:

(1) WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS AN AWARD OF DEATH BENEFITS;

(2) WHETHER AN AWARD OF DEATH BENEFITS SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPORTIONED TO REFLECT PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Issue # 1 and the Law

1.

In a workers' compensation case, the claimant bears the burden of proving by a "fair preponderance of the evidence" each element of the claim. Bracey v. Packard Elec. Div., Gen. Motors Co., 476 So.2d 28, 29 (Miss.1985). These elements are: (1) an accidental injury, (2) arising out of and in the course of employment, and (3) a causal connection between the injury and the death or claimed disability. MISS.CODE ANN. Secs. 71-3-3 & -7 (1972); V. DUNN, MISSISSIPPI WORKERS' COMPENSATION Sec. 265 (3rd ed.1982); see also Strickland v. M.H. McMath Gin, Inc., 457 So.2d 925, 928 (Miss.1984).

The Commission is the ultimate fact-finder. Olen Burrage Trucking Co. v. Chandler, 475 So.2d 437 (Miss.1985); Valley Dry Goods Co. v. Odom, 244 Miss. 125, 141 So.2d 254 (1962). Accordingly, the Commission may accept or reject an administrative judge's findings. Day-Brite Lighting Div., Emerson Elec. Co. v. Cummings, 419 So.2d 211 (Miss.1982). "Doubtful cases should be resolved in favor of compensation, so as to fulfill the beneficial purposes" of statutory law. Miller Transporters, Inc. v. Guthrie, 554 So.2d 917, 918 (Miss.1989) (citing authoritative support).

The circuit courts of this state serve as intermediate appellate courts for workers' compensation cases. Gulf Coast Drilling & Exploration Co. v. Permenter, 214 So.2d 601, 603 (Miss.1968). Circuit courts "review all questions of law and of fact [and i]f no prejudicial error be found, the matter shall be affirmed and remanded to the commission for enforcement." MISS.CODE ANN. Sec. 71-3-51 (1972).

If the Commission's fact-findings are "supported by substantial evidence," then they " 'must' remain undisturbed by the reviewing court." R.C. Petroleum, Inc. & The Travelers Insurance Co. v. Hernandez, 555 So.2d 1017, 1021 (Miss.1990) (quoting Myles v. Rockwell Int'l, 445 So.2d 528, 536 (Miss.1983)). Of great import, fact-findings supported by substantial evidence must remain undisturbed "even though that evidence would not convince us" were this Court the fact-finder. Chandler, 475 So.2d at 439 (citing South Cent. Bell Tel. Co. v. Aden, 474 So.2d 584, 589-90 (Miss.1985)); see also Hernandez, 555 So.2d at 1021-22.

2.

In determining whether benefits should have been awarded, this Court must consider, on an ad hoc basis, whether the three elements of a workers' compensation claim were proved by a fair preponderance.

In the case sub judice, Hardin's and Liberty Mutual do not dispute that Leonard's chest pains and, ultimately, his fatal heart attack, were anything but "accidental." Therefore, the first element--an accidental injury--is deemed admitted without further inquiry.

The second element--an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of employment--is deemed proved. This Court on numerous occasions has sanctioned an award in cases where an activity "over and above the ordinary wear and tear of life" was found to have caused an injury. Such activities were as routine as operating an automatic chisel, measuring a ditch, operating a filling station, and working at a desk as a bookkeeper. See generally V. DUNN, supra, Sec. 93, at 113-14. Leonard's job responsibilities performed over a twenty-five-year period were found by the administrative judge, the Commission, and the circuit court to have contributed to or aggravated to some extent the condition which led to Leonard's chest pain. In view of the evidence, this Court concurs.

Finally, the third element--a causal connection between Leonard's chest pain and his death--is also deemed proved. The evidence clearly shows a connection between Leonard's chest pain and his fatal heart attack which occurred only seven days later.

In sum, the administrative judge, the Commission, and the circuit court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to prove the three elements and justify an award. Applying the law to the evidence, this Court also concludes that an award was justified.

B. Issue # 2 and the Law

1.

Mississippi's workers' compensation law provides for the apportionment of disability or death benefits under certain circumstances. The applicable s...