Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Industrial Com'n, 14596.

• Decision Date: 11 September 1939
• Docket Number: 14596.
• Parties: MONTGOMERY WARD & CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

94 P.2d 689

105 Colo. 22

MONTGOMERY WARD & CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.

No. 14596.

Supreme Court of Colorado

September 11, 1939

Rehearing Denied Oct. 2, 1939.

In Department.

Error to District Court, City and County of Denver; Henry A. Hicks Judge.

Proceeding for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Luella Pentecost, employee, opposed by Montgomery Ward &amp Company, employer. To review a judgment approving an award of compensation by the Industrial Commission, the employer brings error.

Affirmed.

Darwin D. Coit, of Denver, for plaintiff in error.

Byron G. Rogers, Atty. Gen., and Frank A. Bruno, Asst. Atty. Gen for defendants in error.

YOUNG Justice.

The employer, self insured, seeks reversal of a judgment of the district court approving a finding of the Industrial Commission that the claimant had sustained a twenty-five per cent permanent disability from an injury proximately resulting from an accident arising out of and in the course of her employment, and an award of compensation based thereon.

The employer assigns error based on a number of alleged grounds the substance of which is that the evidence before the commission does not support its findings and award. There is no conflict in the testimony concerning the allegations that claimant sustained some injury by reason of an accident; that the accident occurred in the course of claimant's employment; and that it arose out of the employment. There is, however, a sharp conflict in the evidence as to whether claimant sustained any permanent injury, and that if she did, as to the extent of her disability. Eight medical witnesses testified concerning the matter of permanent injury; four of these witnesses had examined claimant at the request of the employer; two were appointed by the commission and two were physicians who had treated claimant for her injuries. In his application to the commission for a review of its finding and award counsel for the employer summarizes the testimony of these witnesses with sufficient accuracy for our purposes in this manner: Three of those who examined claimant at the request of the employer testified that claimant had no permanent injuries. One who examined claimant at the request of the employer testified that she had a five per cent permanent disability as a working unit. One who examined claimant at the request of the commission testified that claimant had a five per cent...