International Yarn Corp. v. Casson
| Decision Date | 30 August 1976 |
| Citation | 541 S.W.2d 150 |
| Parties | INTERNATIONAL YARN CORP., Appellant, v. Gay Lynn CASSON, Appellee. 541 S.W.2d 150 |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Donald G. Dietrich, Leonard M. Caputo, Fillauer, Dietrich, Whitson, Webb & Caputo, Cleveland, for appellant.
Conrad Finnell, James S. Thompson, Finnell, Thompson, Scott & Logan, Cleveland, for appellee.
The employer in this Workmen's Compensation case appeals the Chancellor's finding that the claimant suffered a 35% Permanent partial disability to the body as a whole as the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of her employment. The principal question is whether or not there is any evidence to support the finding that the employee sustained a disability which is permanent.
The evidence shows that Gay Lynn Casson was an employee of International Yarn Corporation and was working on the night of March 16, 1973, when the roof of the defendant's plant collapsed during a rainstorm. At the time of the accident she was sufficiently oriented to get out of the building and to a place of safety and to express concern about a relative who was also working in the building. By the time she reached the parking lot she was nervous and crying and she fainted in the arms of her aunt, who was waiting in the parking lot. She was taken to Bradley Memorial Hospital and admitted with a diagnosis of hysteria. She remained overnight for observation and was dismissed in an improved condition. No symptoms of physical injury were detected, but it was observed that she could not speak well.
The claimant returned to the plant a few days after the occurrence and told the manager she was able to go back to work. She did go back when the plant re-opened in April and continued working until July when she was laid off along with a number of other persons.
Miss Casson testified that she was knocked down by a rush of falling water and hit her head on a piece of equipment. She remembered running out of the building, but could recall nothing further until sometime after she was admitted to the hospital, where she attempted to communicate and found herself unable to speak. After the incident she began to stutter, never having done so before, and the problem continued up until the time of the trial. She also complained of physical pain, especially headaches and back pains, dating from the time of the accident. Her most serious complaint, however, is that, since the accident she has experienced chronic nervousness, irritability and anger.
Other witnesses observed a marked change in the claimant's personality. An aunt described her as 'moody and hateful and gripey . . . not like herself.' Her mother testified that she changed from a cheerful, sociable person into a near-recluse, that she began stuttering shortly after the accident, that she was sick and complained of being in pain much of the time, and that she spends most of her time sleeping and moping in her room. She denied having any reason to think that the failure of Miss Casson's brief marriage following the accident had anything to do with her complaints and testified that even during the time that the claimant continued to work following the accident she was unwell.
This lay testimony is sufficient to support the finding of the Chancellor that Miss Casson's difficulties began with the occurrence at the plant, although there were other possible traumatic episodes in her life between the time of the accident and the trial.
The appellant characterizes the rainstorm which caused the collapse of the building as a hazard common to the neighborhood and not peculiar to plaintiff's employment. Cf. Jackson v. Clark & Fay, Inc., 197 Tenn. 135, 270 S.W.2d 389 (1954); Hill v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 512 S.W.2d 560 (Tenn.1974). Certainly the rain itself was a hazard common to the neighborhood, but Miss Casson's presence in a building that could not withstand the force of ordinary rainfall was a circumstance directly related to the employment. The contention that she must prove the defendant knew of the dangerous condition is not sustainable. This assignment is overruled.
The testimony of Dr. Spalding, a psychiatrist, establishes...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Overstreet v. Shoney's
...or to a mental or psychological impairment. See Kerr v. Magic Chef, Inc., 793 S.W.2d 927, 929 (Tenn. 1990); International Yarn Corp. v. Casson, 541 S.W.2d 150, 152 (Tenn. 1976). Damages for loss of enjoyment of life compensate the injured person for the limitations placed on his or her abil......
-
Yount v. Henrite Products, Inc.
...it in its entirety. See, e.g., Vandergriff v. Bituminous Casualty Corp., 692 S.W.2d 20, 22 (Tenn.1985); International Yarn Corp. v. Casson, 541 S.W.2d 150, 152 (Tenn.1976). In addition, a number of material evidence cases have been remanded for further consideration when the record was so i......
-
Coleman v. St. Thomas Hosp..
...employment conditions subjected Plaintiffs to the hazard of carbon monoxide. We find this case analogous to International Yarn Corporation v. Casson, 541 S.W.2d 150, 151 (Tenn.1976), where an employee was injured when the roof of the building where she worked collapsed during a rainstorm. T......
-
Coleman v. St. Thomas Hosp., 04C-2183
...employment conditions subjected Plaintiffs to the hazard of carbon monoxide. We find this case analogous to International Yarn Corporation v. Casson, 541 S.W.2d 150, 151 (Tenn. 1976), where an employee was injured when the roof of the building where she worked collapsed during a rainstorm. ......