Hunter v. Patrick Const. Co., 22558
Decision Date | 22 April 1986 |
Docket Number | No. 22558,22558 |
Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Parties | Wyatt HUNTER, deceased, Mary Hunter, widow, Robert Lee Hunter, Sally May Hunter, George Hunter, John Ernest Hunter, and Keath Hunter, Appellants. v. PATRICK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Employer, and Employers Insurance of Wausau, Insurer, Respondents. . Heard |
Harry C. Wilson, Jr., of Lee, Wilson, Erter & Booth, Sumter, for appellants.
Paul B. Rodgers, III, of Robinson, McFadden, Moore, Pope, Williams, Taylor & Brailsford, Columbia, for respondents.
In this Worker's Compensation action, the Full Commission reversed the Hearing Commissioner's award of compensation to the beneficiaries of a deceased employee. The Circuit Court affirmed the Full Commission, and the beneficiaries appeal. We affirm.
The only issue in this appeal is whether the decision of the Full Commission is supported by substantial evidence. Lark v. Bi-Lo, Inc., 276 S.C. 130, 276 S.E.2d 304 (1981). The Commission, not this Court, is the fact-finder. It is not within our province to reverse findings supported by substantial evidence.
Substantial evidence is Lark v. Bi-Lo, Inc., 276 S.C. at 136, 276 S.E.2d at 307. 1
The evidence presented below was contradictory; however, the Commission's findings clearly were supported by substantial evidence. Therefore, analogous to a jury's findings of fact on disputed issues, the Commission's conclusions must be affirmed. 2
The deceased died of a heart attack at home four days after his last day of work. He was employed as a cement finisher and had been performing his regular duties. The deceased obviously did not feel well at work a few days before his death; however, he did not seek medical attention, nor did he request to stop work. He ignored his supervisor's advice to work at his own pace.
The work performed by deceased was typical of cement finishing. He worked 8-10 hours per day. The job on which he was working, although short crewed, was not behind schedule, nor was it in a rush posture. Five days before his death, the crew's lunch break was either late or abbreviated which was not unusual. Based on the testimony of a state climatologist, it was concluded that the temperature when the deceased last worked was not unusually or extraordinarily high.
Based on these findings, the Commission concluded that the decedent's heart attack was not the result of unusual or extraordinary conditions of employment. See Bridges v. Housing Authority, City of Charleston, 278 S.C. 342, 295 S.E.2d 872 (1982). As the Circuit Court concluded, "[t]he...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Muir v. CR Bard, Inc.
...is not within our province to reverse findings of the Commission which are supported by substantial evidence. Hunter v. Patrick Constr. Co., 289 S.C. 46, 344 S.E.2d 613 (1986). A court may not substitute its judgment for that of an agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fac......
-
State v. Smith
...... Before leaving, however, he asked a co-employee to clock him out at his normal quitting time of ......
-
Broughton v. South of the Border, 3024.
...is not within our province to reverse findings of the Commission which are supported by substantial evidence. Hunter v. Patrick Constr. Co., 289 S.C. 46, 344 S.E.2d 613 (1986). See Tiller, supra (appellate court must affirm findings of fact made by Commission if they are supported by substa......
-
State v. Robinson
...... gathering evidence of the conspiracy and locating co-conspirators took substantial time. Specifically, the State ......