Hicks v. Meridian Lumber Co.

• Decision Date: 27 November 1922
• Docket Number: 23863
• Citation: 94 So. 903,152 La. 975
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: HICKS et al. v. MERIDIAN LUMBER CO

94 So. 903

152 La. 975

HICKS et al. v. MERIDIAN LUMBER CO

No. 23863

Supreme Court of Louisiana

November 27, 1922

Rehearing Denied December 29, 1922

Appeal from Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Rapides Jas. Andrews, Judge.

Suit by Mrs. Annie Myrtle Hicks and others on behalf of herself and her minor children against the Meridian Lumber Company for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act for the death of her husband. From a judgment for defendant plaintiffs appeal.

Affirmed.

Robert R. Stone, of Lake Charles, for appellants.

Thornton, Gist & Richey, of Alexandria, for appellee.

ST. PAUL, J. O'NIELL, J.

OPINION

ST. PAUL, J.

Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and her minor children, claims compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Statute (Act No. 20 of 1914), for the death of her husband whilst in defendant's service.

The husband died at his home on Sunday, March 30, 1919, from the rupture of an aneurism of the thoracic aorta; and it is alleged that the aneurism was either caused, or hastened to rupture, by a strain suffered by the deceased on March 16th whilst hoisting some steel beams to a skidder boom. It is shown that he continued at his work one week longer, to wit, until March 23d; on which day he went home sick and sent for a physician, who informed him of the aneurism aforesaid and confined him to his home; where he remained until he died.

I.

It is quite immaterial for the purposes of this case whether the alleged strain brought on the aneurism, or merely hastened the inevitable rupture; for this court would allow compensation in either case.

In Craft v. Lumber Co., 151 La. 281, 285, 91 So. 736, 737, we allowed compensation although we were "strongly persuaded from the evidence that at the time the plaintiff received the blow in the lower part of the abdomen he had a hernia in process of development, which was quickened and greatly accelerated by the blow he received."

In Hooper v. Standard Ins. Co., 166 Mo.App. 209, 148 S.W. 116, it was held that

"Where a man is so afflicted that he will die from such affliction within a very short time, yet if, by some accidental means, his death is caused sooner, it will be a death from 'accident,' within the meaning of * * * an accident insurance policy."

In Carter Packet Co. v. Reinhardt, 13 Orleans Appeal, 462, it was held that --

"Where the accident was the immediate cause of death, it is immaterial under the (Workmen's Compensation) act whether or not the employee be or be not peculiarly subject to have such accident befall him or to suffer therefrom more than another differently situated; the sole question being whether the accident was the immediate cause of the injury."

And there can be no doubt that such is the law. Thus:

In Behan v. Honor Co., 143 La. 348, 78 So. 589, L. R. A 1918F, 862, this court held that --

"The fact that an employee, injured in performing services arising out of and incidental to his employment in the course of his employer's occupation, was already afflicted with a dormant disease that might some day have produced physical disability is no reason why the employee should not be allowed compensation, under the employers' liability statute, for the injury which, added to the disease, superinduced...