Kearse v. South Carolina Wildlife Resources Dept.

• Decision Date: 01 July 1960
• Docket Number: No. 17675,17675
• Citation: 115 S.E.2d 183,236 S.C. 540
• Parties: James Clyde KEARSE, Respondent, v. SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, and the South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Fund, Appellants.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

Page 183

115 S.E.2d 183

236 S.C. 540

James Clyde KEARSE, Respondent, v. SOUTH CAROLINA WILDLIFE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, and the South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Fund, Appellants.

No. 17675.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

July 1, 1960.

Daniel R. McLeod, Atty. Gen., Julian L. Johnson and David Aiken, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellant.

Kearse & Kemp, Bamberg, for respondent.

OXNER, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court affirming an award of compensation made by the Industrial Commission.

Claimant, James Clyde Kearse, who was employed by the South Carolina Wildlife Resources Department as a game warden, suffered a cerebral thrombosis on May 11, 1958, causing partial paralysis and total disability. He was then 63 years of age. The Industrial Commission found that the thrombosis was precipitated by unusually strenuous activity between May 5th and May 11, 1958, and constituted a compensable accident.

Kearse had been a game warden for approximately sixteen years. For a period of two or three weeks prior to his stroke the water in the Little Salkehatchie River was unusually high and there had been a great amount of fish trapping. He and other game wardens, working together, took extreme measures in trying to apprehend the violators. They drove themselves relentlessly, customarily meeting at the swamp each morning before daylight and not leaving until after dark, usually returning to their homes between 8:00 and 10:00 o'clock at night, thereby working between sixteen and eighteen hours a day.

Tuesday, May 6th, was an extremely strenuous day. Kearse along with three other game wardens went to the river that morning before daylight to a spot where a boat had been hidden by them the day before. After putting on hip boots, he and another game warden dragged the boat over cypress knees, logs, mud and water to the main stream, a distance of about fifty yards. While the other game warden held a flashlight, Kearse paddled the boat up the stream about 300 yards. The two then got out and dragged it about 25 or 30 feet to another hiding place where they remained until five o'clock that afternoon when Kearse displayed symptoms of exhaustion and illness. The game wardens then returned to their respective homes. Kearse was unable to work the next day but returned to his job on the 8th and continued working until the 11th. Although he never fully recovered from the symptoms displayed on the 6th, there were several occasions afterward when he was subjected to extreme exertion, one of them being when the automobile had to be pushed a considerable distance over rough terrain to get it started. On Sunday, May 11th, the game wardens returned to the same area about daylight. Kearse remained in the car. Between 8:00 and 9:00 o'clock that morning the other game wardens attempted to contact him by radio but were unable to do so. One of them went back to the car and found him looking very pale and sick. He then returned home and suffered a stroke early that afternoon.

There is considerable conflict in the testimony as to Kearse's previous medical history. A physician at the Veterans Hospital in Columbia testified that he was a patient there for about a month during the early part of 1950 and was treated for a coronary thrombosis said to have been confirmed by the cardiograms. The records of that hospital disclose that he was then rated as being totally and permanently disabled and drew a pension from January 9, 1950 to February, 1951, at which time it was discontinued because his income exceeded the statutory limitations. On the other hand, two physicians of Bamberg County, where Kearse resided, testified that on several occasions he displayed symptoms of a heart attack but each time the cardiograms were negative with no indication of a thrombosis. It may be added that there is no evidence that he suffered any prolonged illness or lost any appreciable time from his work from 1950 until his stroke in 1958.

These physicians also disagreed as to whether there was any causal connection between Kearse's work as a game warden and his present condition. Immediately after suffering the stroke on May 11th, he was taken to a hospital at Bamberg where he remained until June 16th. There he was treated by two local physicians who expressed the unqualified opinion that his stroke was brought about by the prolonged fatigue, tension and exertion connected with his work as game warden immediately preceding his illness. On June 16th he was taken to the Veterans Hospital in Columbia, where he remained until August 9th. A physician there testified that they found that he had an arteriosclerotic heart disease. He said that Kearse's condition both in 1950 and in 1958 was a manifestation of 'a generalized vascular disorder, hardening of the arteries' and that basically in each instance the pathology was the same except the site of involvement was different. He declined to say that Kearse's activities as game warden precipitated his stroke, stating that that was a mere possibility.

Did Claimant suffer an injury by accident within the meaning of Section 72-14 of the 1952 Code? A determination of this question necessitates a review of the cases where disability or death of an employee results as a consequence of exertions in the performance of his duties. It is now well settled in this State that a coronary occlusion or thrombosis suffered by an employee constitutes a compensable 'accident' if it is induced by unexpected strain or over-exertion in the performance of the duties of his employment or by unusual and extraordinary conditions in the employment. Green v. City of Bennettsville, 197 S.C. 313, 15 S.E.2d 334; Willis v. Aiken County, 203 S.C. 96, 26 S.E.2d 313; Windham v. City of Florence, 221 S.C. 350, 70 S.E.2d 553. This is true even though there is a preexisting pathology which may have been a contributing factor. Sweatt v. Marlboro Cotton Mills, 206 S.C. 476, 34 S.E.2d 762; Raley v. City of Camden, 222 S.C. 303, 72 S.E.2d 572. And the right to compensation is not affected by the fact that the unusual or excessive strain which precipitates the heart attack occurs while the employee is performing work of the same general type as that in which he is regularly involved. Sweatt v. Marlboro Cotton Mills, supra, 206 S.C. 476, 34 S.E.2d 762; Ricker v. Village Management Corporation, 231 S.C. 47, 97 S.E.2d 83. The phrase 'unusual or excessive strain' used in many of the cases,...