Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission of Arizona

Decision Date08 June 1931
Docket NumberCivil 3042
Citation38 Ariz. 307,299 P. 1026
PartiesHARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, Petitioner, v. THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ARIZONA, and R. B. SIMS, BURT H. CLINGAN and WILLIAM E. HUNTER, Members of the Said THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ARIZONA, Respondents
CourtArizona Supreme Court

Original proceeding for Writ of Certiorari to The Industrial Commission of Arizona, on application of insurance carrier. Award affirmed.

Messrs Conner & Jones, for Petitioner.

Mr Terrence A. Carson (Mr. Charles Blenman, of Counsel), for Respondents.

OPINION

ROSS, J.

This case grows out of a claim by Carrie M. Kronnick against the Santa Rita Hotel Company, of Tucson, employer, and the Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, insurance carrier, for compensation for the death of her husband, Frank S. Kronnick caused, as claimed, by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. The insurance carrier, being dissatisfied with the award made by the Industrial Commission, brings the case here, contending the commission's finding to the effect that Kronnick's death was proximately caused by the accident is not supported by the evidence, is contrary to the evidence, is founded on mere speculation, surmise, and possibilities. This is the sole question.

That Kronnick suffered an accident and severe injuries is not disputed, nor is it questioned that, if the evidence showed he died by reason of such injuries, or that they contributed thereto, the claimant is entitled to death benefits.

By a post-mortem it was discovered that Kronnick had a diseased heart, and it is contended he died solely by reason of such diseased condition, and that the injuries did not cause or contribute to his death.

On June 18, 1930, while Kronnick was engaged in making some alterations in his employer's hotel building, he fell from a scaffolding to the cement flooring, and sustained a severe comminuted fracture of his right heel bone and a simple fracture of the right crest of the pelvis. At the time he was sixty-two years of age. He was a very healthy man; had never been subject to any ailment, disease, illness, weakness, infirmity or disability, except about one year before he had gotten something in his eye and called a doctor to treat it. Beyond that, says his wife, during the thirty-seven years of their married life, he had never to her knowledge been attended by a physician until this accident.

Dr. G. W. Purcell attended Kronnick from the time of his injury until he died on July 3, 1930, and it is largely upon his testimony the insurance carrier relies to establish its claim that death was not the result of the fall but solely from a diseased heart. This witness stated that he was called immediately after Kronnick was hurt; that he sent him to Mercy Hospital; that he gave him the ordinary ad usual treatment in such cases; that his improvement was good, and his condition generally good, except that he had a couple of days after the injury taken a cold and had fever; that the fever disappeared, but his lungs were congested right along; that he was permitted to be up in a wheel-chair on the tenth day; that later he was allowed to go around in his room on crutches. He said fever was naturally to be expected from an injury such as Kronnick's; that it came from the absorption of "serum created as a result of the injury, and also from the bronchitis that he had"; that fever predisposed a patient to pneumonia, and affected the functioning of the heart. Explaining the circumstances of Kronnick's death, the witness said that during the morning of July 3d he (Kronnick) went to the bathroom, and the nurses, hearing a noise, went to him; that they "found him in a fainting condition, with his hand grasped up here on the heart, complaining of severe pain and cold sweat . . . a severe diarrhea set in about that time and he had a severe pain at the left of the heart." He was taken to his room, and before the doctor arrived he was dead.

This witness was present at the post-mortem, and, when asked what in his opinion, based upon his knowledge of the case and the findings at the post-mortem, caused the death of Mr. Kronnick, answered:

"Well, I believe he died of a -- what we might call a heart death. An occlusion and thrombosis of the left coronary artery. . . .

"Well, he had a sclerosis of the coronary artery and a chronic inflammation of the heart muscles, with a chronic inflammation of the aorta and he also had an occlusion of the heart which was caused by stoppage in the flow of the left coronary artery. It was a diseased heart."

Then this question was asked and answered:

"Q. Is a death, doctor, such as Mr. Kronnick suffered, in your opinion a natural result of the injuries he sustained from that fall on the 18th of June? A I don't think so.

On cross-examination Dr. Purcell was asked if Kronnick's heart condition could have been caused by the accident, and he answered:

"Well, I believe that there is a possibility that there could be some connection there . . . . i cannot convince myself to entirely disconnect this infarct or obstruction from the accident . . . . Well, I don't think it could be entirely disconnected because this man had a temperature and was confined to bed and his blood stream was slowed down and he had abnormal circulation no doubt. It could have formed a clot at this point -- enough to produce the thrombosis. It could have done that -- it is possible."

The referee put to Dr. Purcell the following hypothetical question: "Would you say that if you have a man 62 years of age who has fallen and broken his hip and suffered a very severe injury to his os calcis, who was considered in some danger of pneumonia -- had a bad cold -- a fever -- might to exacerbate the heart condition as to bring to an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Aranguena v. Triumph Mining Company
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • 13 Mayo 1942
    ... ... COMPENSATION LAW-DISEASE-ACCIDENT-FINDINGS OF ... BOARD-REVIEW-EVIDENCE-EXPERT ... 1. The ... findings of the Industrial Accident Board adverse to ... appellant upon ... (Carroll v. Industrial ... Accident Commission, 195 P. 1097 (Colo.) (2); ... Nicholson v ... Commission, 73 Utah 568, 276 P. 161; Hartford ... Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Industrial ... ...
  • Mrs. H. D. Morrill v. Charles Bianchi & Sons, Inc
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • 2 Enero 1935
    ... ... Accident Arising Out of and in Course of ... 279 Pa. 5, 123 A. 590; Hartz v. Hartford Faience ... Co. , 90 Conn. 539, 97 A. 1020, and ... Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Ind ... Board , 38 Ariz. 307, 299 P ... ...
  • Revles v. Industrial Commission of Ariz.
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • 1 Junio 1960
    ...v. Industrial Commission, supra; Gronowski v. Industrial Commission, 81 Ariz. 363, 306 P.2d 285; Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission, 38 Ariz. 307, 299 P. 1026; Phoenix Bakery v. Industrial Commission, 78 Ariz. 188, 277 P.2d 745; Phelps Dodge Corp., Douglas Reduction ......
  • Eagle Indem. Co. v. Hadley
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • 8 Mayo 1950
    ...arthritis; Maxwell v. Hart, 45 Ariz. 198, 41 P.2d 1089, involving a rupture and back injury; Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission, 38 Ariz. 307, 299 P. 1026, involving a heart ailment; Dauber v. City of Phoenix, 59 Ariz. 489, 130 P.2d 56, involving a rupture of stomach......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT