Moore v. Louisville Hydroelectric Co.
| Citation | 223 Ky. 710 |
| Parties | Moore v. Louisville Hydroelectric Company, et al. |
| Decision Date | 23 March 1928 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky) |
2. Master and Servant. — In compensation proceedings refusal of Compensation Board to reopen case to hear physician's testimony was not error under Workmen's Compensation Act, sec. 21 (Ky. Stats., sec. 4902), where no change of conditions, mistake, or fraud was alleged, and no reason shown why doctor was not called as witness at original hearing.
3. Master and Servant. — Findings of fact by Workmen's Compensation Board in compensation proceedings are conclusive on the courts if supported by any evidence.
4. Master and Servant. — In proceedings under Workmen's Compensation Act (Ky. Stats., sec. 4880 et seq., as amended), finding of Compensation Board that workman's claim for hernia as result of rock falling upon his leg was an afterthought and not compensable held not sustained by evidence, where based merely on omission of reference thereto in report of doctor, who diagnosed case as hernia both before and after time report was made.
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.
ROBERT HUBBARD for appellant.
FRED FORCHT and ELI BERRY for appellees.
Reversing.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Jefferson circuit court affirming the action of the Workmen's Compensation Board in denying compensation to James Moore for an injury alleged to have been suffered by him in the course of his employment by the Louisville Hydroelectric Company.
Moore was employed by the appellee corporation, and claimed he was injured on May 12, 1926, by a large rock which he, assisted by another workman, was carrying, when it split and fell upon his leg. He testified that all the weight of the rock fell upon his leg and injured the shin bone and caused a hurting in his right side over the groin. He returned to work the next day and was discharged.
On the 15th day of May, he consulted Dr. Isaac T. Houck, who testified that he examined Moore and found an infected sore on the tibia bone. He further said that Moore was complaining of a pain radiating from his right groin and extending all the way down his leg, which he diagnosed as an inguinal hernia.
On June 7, 1926, application for compensation was made to the Workmen's Compensation Board, and in the application Moore described the nature of his injury as a hernia from lifting and a bruise on the right lower limb above the ankle which had infection. The case was heard by a member of the board and resulted in a finding of temporary total disability from May 12 to June 10, and a denial of compensation for the hernia because it was not referred to in the report of the doctor and was therefore an afterthought. The full board affirmed the finding.
Application was then made for a reopening of the case to take the testimony of Dr. Hancock, who had examined Moore in June or July previously. This request was denied, and a petition for review was filed in the Jefferson circuit court, resulting in an affirmance of the action of the board.
There was no error in sustaining the finding of the Workmen's Compensation Board that notice of the injury was sufficient, as there was evidence to that effect.
The court was also correct in refusing to require the board to re-open the case to hear the testimony of Dr. Hancock. There was no change of conditions, mistake, or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American Bituminous Coal Co. v. Ponder
...of substantial value, carrying the quality of proof. Smith Coal Co. v. Hawkins 222 Ky. 284, 300 S.W. 609; Moore v. Louisville Hydroelectric Co., 223 Ky. 710, 4 S.W. (2d) 701. Whether Wilburn was an independent contractor under the facts shown was a question of law. The statement of a witnes......