L. B. Priester & Son, Inc. v. Bynum's Dependents
| Decision Date | 14 May 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 42327,42327 |
| Citation | 141 So.2d 246,244 Miss. 185 |
| Parties | L. B. PRIESTER & SON, INC., et al. v. DEPENDENTS OF Clarence Edwin BYNUM, Deceased. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Lawrence W. Rabb, Meridian, for appellants.
Ethridge, Minniece & Bourdeaux, Meridian, for appellees.
This is an appeal by the employer and carrier in a workmen's compensation case from an order of the Circuit Court of Lauderdale County reversing the final order of the Commission.
At the hearing before the attorney-referee, the claimant offered her proof and rested. The employer and carrier moved for a dismissal of the claim on the ground that the claim had not been established, in that the claimant had not met the burden of proof and had failed to show a causal connection between the decedent's death and his work activities. The motion was sustained and the claim dismissed. On appeal to the Workmen's Compensation Commission, the order of dismissal was affirmed. On appeal to the circuit court, a judgment was entered reversing the order of the Commission and remanding the case to the Commission in order to give the employer and carrier an opportunity to present evidence.
Forms B-11 and B-5 stated that the decedent suffered a heart attack, arising out of, and while in the course of, his employment. The deceased was found dead on September 10, 1960, on the premises of the employer's repair shop in Meridian, Lauderdale County, Mississippi. He was foreman of the shop, his employer being a contractor and builder. Normally the shop closed about 12 o'clock on Saturdays, on which day the death occurred. It was Bynum's duty to close the shop. The record discloses deceased was working in the shop about 12 o'clock or shortly thereafter, and was found dead with the keys of the building on the floor near him in front of the tool cabinet about 12:50 P.M. There is much in the record in regard to prior heart treatment while working a few years before at Itta Bena, Mississippi. The decedent had suffered with migraine headaches for several years, as well as having been treated by physicians for heart ailments. During the monring of September 10th, between 11 and 12 o'clock, decedent left his work and went to the office of Dr. William R. Mitchum, Jr., and was treated for a severe headache and was advised to go home and go to bed. This was the advice the doctor had always given him when he treated him for severe headaches. However, the decedent went back to work.
Both Dr. William R. Mitchum, Jr. and Dr. B. J. Price, Internal Medical Specialists, had treated deceased in the past, and, although both testified, neither was able to express a definite opinion as to the cause of death. Neither saw the deceased after his death. Dr. Mitchum testified that deceased had come to his office on several occasions after a day's work complaining of severe headaches.
It is clear from the record that, after the visit to Dr. Mitchum on the morning of his death, deceased returned to his place of employment and remained and performed his duties until found on the floor. Since deceased was in charge of the shop in which he was found dead, the testimony shows that it was his duty to close the shop, and lock it up when he left. He was paid by the week and not by the hour, and his duties required him to stay overtime on some occasions. The record indicates that he was in the process of preparing to use a pickup truck which had been borrowed from his employer. It is undisputed that he had not closed the shop for the day, although it was a few minutes later in point of time than the shop actually remained open on Saturdays.
The question before the Court is whether deceased, Clarence E. Bynum, died within the spatial and time limits of his employment and his death occurred while he was in the course and scope of his employment. That is, whether or not the 1960 amendment to the Mississippi Workmen's Compensation Act, and particularly the Amendment to Section 6998-02(9) of the Miss.Code of 1942, Rec., did away with the well-established presumption of causal relation between the employment and death where an employee is found dead within the spatial and time limits of his employment.
In the regular Legislative Session of 1960, the Miss. Legislature passed a series of amendments to the Workmen's Compensation Act. Among these was one to Section 2(9), being Code 1942, Res., Section 6998-02(9), by adding the italicized words, as follows: "Disability' means incapacity because of injury to earn the wages which the employee was receiving at the time of injury in the same or other employment, which incapacity and the extent thereof must be supported by medical findings.'
Appellants contend...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leake County Coop. (A.A.L.) v. Barrett's Dependents, 45356
...to follow arbitrarily the findings of the commission. L. B. Priester & Son, Inc. v. Dependents of Bynum, 244 Miss. 185, 137 So.2d 907, 141 So.2d 246, sugg. of error overruled 142 So.2d 30 (1962); Holman v. Standard Oil Co., 242 Miss. 657, 136 So.2d 591 (1962); Shannon v. City of Hazlehurst,......
-
Smith Petroleum Service, Inc. v. Monsanto Chemical Co.
...his employer. Mississippi Code § 6998-05. See L. B. Priester & Son, Inc. v. Dependents of Bynum, 1962, 244 Miss. 185, 137 So.2d 907, 141 So.2d 246, 142 So.2d 30, 31. Courts construing Mississippi law should not allow an employee to do indirectly (through a third party) what he has been forb......
-
Armstrong Tire & Rubber Co. v. Payton
...of Layton, 244 Miss. 641, 145 So.2d 165 (1962); L. B. Priester & Son, Inc. v. Dependents of Bynum, 244 Miss. 185, 137 So.2d 907, 141 So.2d 246, 142 So.2d 30 (1962). However, I am of the opinion that the argument that the Workmen's Compensation Commission can, upon remand from this Court, pe......
-
L. B. Priester & Son, Inc. v. Bynum's Dependents
...It came, first, on a motion to dismiss (244 Miss. 185, 137 So.2d 907), and, thereafter, it was heard on regular appeal (244 Miss. 185, 141 So.2d 246). It was determined by this Court on the prior appeals that an amendment to the Workmen's Compensation Law, Sec. 6998-02, (9), Code 1942, by t......