Lawrence v. Stark Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Co.

Decision Date04 June 1929
Docket NumberNo. 20666.,20666.
Citation18 S.W.2d 89
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
PartiesLAWRENCE v. STARK BROS. NURSERIES & ORCHARDS CO. et al.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pike County; Edgar B. Woolfolk, Judge.

"Not to be officially published."

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Charles E. Lawrence against Stark Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Company, employer, and the Ætna Life Insurance Company, insurer. The award of the Commission was affirmed, and employer and insurer appeal. Affirmed.

C. E. Klein, of St. Louis, and W. C. Ropiequet, of East St. Louis, Ill., for appellants.

Davis Benning and May & May, all of Louisiana, Mo., for respondent.

BENNICK, C.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the circuit court of Pike county affirming an award made by the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Commission.

On May 13, 1927, the claimant, Charles E. Lawrence, filed with the commission his claim for compensation for what he designated as an injury to his abdomen, but which was shown to have been a hernia, alleged to have been sustained by him on March 25, 1927, while he was engaged in piling up a rick of grapes in the packing house of his employer, Stark Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Company, at Louisiana, Mo.

For its answer to the claim, the employer denied that an accident, as defined by section 7, par. (b), of the act (Laws 1927, p. 495), had occurred; and, for further answer, denied generally that the claim had set forth facts so as to entitle the claimant to compensation under section 17, par. (b), of the act (the hernia statute), and, specifically, that there was an accident resulting in hernia, that the hernia immediately followed the accident, and that the hernia did not exist in any degree prior to the alleged accident for which compensation was claimed.

On February 10, 1928, after a hearing before the full commission, final judgment was rendered, awarding to the claimant the sum of $175 for medical aid, and $10 a week for twelve weeks for temporary total disability, together with an allowance of attorney's fees in the sum of $60 in favor of Davis Benning.

At the time of the making of the final award, the commission filed its findings of fact and rulings of law as a part of the record of the proceedings. It expressly found that the injury was a right, indirect, inguinal hernia; that prior to the accident the inguinal canals, and the inner and outer inguinal rings, of the claimant, were weakened, enlarged, and relaxed on both sides, and that on the right side there was a protruding hernial sac and contents which had never previously protruded beyond the inner ring; that the accident caused a further protrusion, accompanied by a sharp pain, and the appearance of the hernia in several days beyond the right external ring; that the hernia existed prior to the accident, so that, under section 17, par. (b), of the act, no compensation was payable for permanent partial disability and that there was a pre-existing condition aggravated by the accident. The commission found further that the aggravation of the hernia could be cured by an operation at an inconsiderable risk; that the claimant was willing to undergo such operation; that there had been four weeks of temporary total disability, due to the efforts put forth to reduce the hernia by use of a truss; and that the operation would entail eight weeks of additional temporary total disability.

The rulings of law handed down by the commission were two in number: First, that, where an accident so aggravates a pre-existing hernia as to make an operation necessary, no compensation is payable under section 17, par. (b), of the act, for permanent partial disability, but that compensation is payable under other sections of the act for the consequences of the aggravation, including the cost of the operation, temporary total disability caused thereby, and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Wood v. Wagner Elec. Corp.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 11, 1946
    ... ... 669, 16 N.E.2d ... 984; Gentry v. Williams Bros., 134 Kan. 408, 10 P.2d ... 856; Schiller v. B. & O. Ry ... Taxicab Co., 223 Mo.App. 376, 18 S.W.2d 84; Lawrence ... v. Stark Bros., 18 S.W.2d 89. (2) Although the ... Lawrence v. Stark Brothers Nurseries & Orchards Co. (Mo ... App.), 18 S.W.2d 89 because it ... ...
  • Wolfgeher v. Wagner Cartage Service, Inc.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • February 23, 1983
    ...of any unusual strain. Carr v. Murch Bros. Constr. Co., 223 Mo.App. 788, 21 S.W.2d 897 (Mo.App.1929); Lawrence v. Stark Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Co., 18 S.W.2d 89 (Mo.App.1929). In rejecting the employer's contention that the statutory language "unexpected or unforeseen event" means some ......
  • O'Malley v. Mack International Motor Truck Corp.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • October 7, 1930
    ... ... Co., 18 S.W.2d 86, and cases cited; Howe v. Stark ... Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Co., 22 S.W.2d 839 ... City Power & Light Co., 18 S.W.2d 97; Lawrence v. Stark ... Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Co., 18 S.W.2d 89, ... ...
  • Carr v. Murch Bros. Const. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 3, 1929
    ... ... Carloading & Distributing Co. (Mo. App.), 18 S.W.2d 86; ... Lawrence v. Stark Bros. Nurseries & Orchards Co. (Mo ... App.), 18 S.W.2d 89; ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT