Moller v. Atlas Steel. Prod.s Co.

Citation58 A.2d 81
PartiesMOLLER v. ATLAS STEEL. PRODUCTS CO.
Decision Date30 March 1948
CourtNew Jersey Court of Common Pleas

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Workmen's Compensation Bureau.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Elsa Moller, claimant, to recover compensation for death of her husband, opposed by Atlas Steel Products Company, employer. From award of Workmen's Compensation Bureau, the claimant appeals.

Petition dismissed.

Chris. Pappas, of Hoboken (Louis Steisel, and Elsie L. White, both of Jersey City, of counsel), for petitioner-appellant.

O'Mara, Conway & Schumann, of Jersey City (Charles J. Gormley, of Jersey City, of counsel), for respondent-appellee.

DREWEN, Judge.

Petitioner's decedent collapsed and died instantly while at his work. He was 57 years of age and had apparently been in continuous good health. He was a glazer and his employment at the time was in the removal of putty from steel window frames, in which he used an air chisel connected by hose with a movable compressor standing on the floor. The chisel, which the user held in both hands, weighed about six or seven pounds; the added weight of the connected hose made a total of ten pounds. Whether or not decedent was actually supporting the weight of the hose at the time he fell, or, indeed, whether he was then actually operating the chisel, is not at all clear from the testimony.

According to fellow workers ‘sometimes the putty chips off light, sometimes hard * * * at times it doesn't take much effort. * * * sometimes you got to put some pressure on it if the putty is hard; if the putty is soft it goes very easy.’ There was nothing extraordinary in decedent's work. He had been doing the same thing steadily for a considerable period. It was his customary occupation. Counsel made particular effort, and by a rather free use of leading questions, to show a significant degree of strain or exertion in decedent's activity prior to his death, but entirely without effect, as we view the record.

Is there the requisite proof that death was causally related to the employment? We judge not. Decedent had just returned from lunch and had scarcely resumed his work when he fell dead. One of petitioner's medical experts gives it as his opinion that death ‘was caused by an anoxia secondary to the effort in which he was engaged’; that having just eaten lunch he (decedent) was subject to a decrease in the circulation to the heart; that the ‘effort of chipping and the vibration set up by the hammer * * * was enough to cause a relative deficiency to the heart muscle with resultant death of the heart muscle known as myocardial infarction, with death.’ Nothing is disclosed with respect to the ‘effort of chipping’ more than we have already mentioned; and concerning any ‘vibration set up by the hammer’ there is simply no showing of a degree of vibration such as to render vibration an evidential factor in the case. Surely we would not be warranted in assuming that vibration, without more and...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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