J. & B. Mfg. Co. v. Cochran

• Decision Date: 26 January 1953
• Docket Number: No. 38636,38636
• Citation: 62 So.2d 378,216 Miss. 336
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: J. & B. MFG. CO. et al. v. COCHRAN.

Page 378

62 So.2d 378

216 Miss. 336

J. & B. MFG. CO. et al. v. COCHRAN.

No. 38636.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 26, 1953.

Rae Bryant, Gulfport, for appellants.

O. F. & J. O. Moss, Lucedale, for appellee.

HALL, Justice.

This appeal is from a judgment of the circuit court affirming an award of the Workmen's Compensation Commission in favor of appellee for a hernia sustained by him in the course of his employment.

Appellants, the employer and its insurance carrier, contend that the claimant's testimony, coupled with the physical facts and surrounding circumstances, do not support his claim as falling within that part of the Compensation Act with reference to hernia, Chapter 412, Laws of 1950, Section 6, paragraph (f), amending Section 8 of Chapter 354, Laws of 1948, found as Section 6998-12 of the Supplement to Code of 1942, the applicable portion of which is as follows:

'(f) In all cases of claim for hernia, it shall be shown by a preponderance of the evidence:

'1. That the descent or protrusion of the hernia or rupture immediately followed as the result of sudden effort, severe strain, or the application of force to the abdominal wall;

'2. That there was severe pain in the region of the hernia or repture;

'3. That there has been no descent or protrusion of the hernia or rupture prior to the accident for which compensation is claimed;

'4. That the physical distress resulting from the descent or protrusion of the hernia or rupture was noticed immediately by claimant, and communicated to his employer within a reasonable time;

'5. That the physical distress following the descent or protrusion of the hernia or rupture was such as to require the attendance of a licensed physician or surgeon within five (5) days after the injury for which compensation is claimed. Postoperative hernias shall be considered as original hernias.'

The evidence is that the employer was engaged in the construction of a building at Keesler Air Force Base near Biloxi. Concrete for the ground floor and the second floor had been poured. As a support for the concrete used in the second floor until it had hardened the employer had used metal pans about twelve feet in length, about three feet in width and about six inches in depth with a flange of an inch or two in width. These pans were placed with the bottom side up. The metal was about one-eighth of an inch in thickness and the pans weighed approximately 150 pounds each. The concrete had hardened and the employer was engaged in taking down the pans. Three men were engaged in doing this work. They were required to stand on a kind of scaffold about three feet above the ground floor. Claimant and a fellow servant were required to reach above their heads and grasp the pans with their hands while the foreman pried the pan loose from the hardened concrete with a kind of crowbar, and they were then required to lower the pan to the platform of the scaffold on which they were standing. The hours of work were from 7 a. m. until 3:30 p. m. with one-half hour off for lunch. At about 2:30 p. m. on April 17, 1951, while claimant and his fellow servant were engaged in lowering one of these pans, the fellow servant lost his hold and dropped his side of the pan. This gave the claimant a severe jerk and subjected him to a heavy strain. He testified that he immediately felt a stinging sensation in the inguinal region and in a few minutes felt a protrusion at that point. He continued to work for about another hour when the crew quit for the day. That night he was nauseated and unable to sleep. The next morning he reported the incident to his foreman who sent him to the first aid station and on the following day he was sent to the company's doctor. That doctor found him suffering from a hydrocele and prescribed a belt of some type which claimant obtained and started wearing. His condition did not improve and about a month later the company's doctor found that claimant was suffering with a double hernia,--one side complete and the other side incomplete. It was established beyond question that claimant had no hernia prior to the...