Norris v. Industrial Commission
Decision Date | 22 October 1936 |
Docket Number | 5657 |
Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Parties | NORRIS v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al |
Original proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Ione W. Norris, widow of Thomas E. Norris, deceased employee, on behalf of herself and Thomas E. Norris, Jr. minor son of deceased, opposed by the Industrial Commission of Utah, Publix Theatres Corporation, employer, and the Employers' Liability Assurance Corporation, insurance carrier, to review an order of the Industrial Commission denying compensation.
ORDER AFFIRMED.
Willard Hanson, of Salt Lake City, for plaintiff.
Joseph Chez, Atty. Gen., and Gustin & Richards, of Salt Lake City for defendants.
More accurately used, an occlusion seems to be the general term for a closing of the vein or blood vessel to the passage of the blood. It may be caused by a thrombosis or an embolus; a thrombosis, the plugging of a blood vessel through the formation of a clot or obstruction on the walls of the vessel or vein; an embolus, a plug which floats along until it becomes lodged so as to obstruct the passage of the blood. It consists usually of a clot of fibrin, a shred from a morbid growth, a globule of fat, air bubbles, or a micro-organism. Thrombosis and occlusion are often used interchangeably because a thrombus causes occlusion. An embolus or floating particle by attaching itself or becoming wedged may form a thrombosis or occlusion, but ordinarily a thrombus is caused by an inflammation of the walls of the vessel. In this case the cause of the death being conceded to be an occlusion of the coronary artery, the question was: Was it caused by an embolus which broke from the thrombosis of the longus saphenous vein of the right leg or from the appendicitis operation, or from some other cause? If from the first, the death would be traceable to the accident and the defendants would be liable. If from the second or third causes, it would not be traceable to the accident, at least with sufficient conviction to rise to the dignity of proof.
The Commission found that the death was caused by (Italics ours). On rehearing the decision was affirmed, but the findings did not include the specific sentence above italicized, but stated that it "was not caused by any accident or injury arising out of or in the course of the employment with the Publix Theatres Corporation, as heretofore found in its Findings of April 24th, 1934."
The applicant founds her appeal on the familiar contention that the "uncontradicted testimony clearly shows that said Norris died as a result of the injuries received on December 9th, 1932, while in the course of his employment and that the decision of the Industrial Commission is contrary to and not sustained by [any substantial] evidence." To this we cannot accede. A reading of the record convinces us that the commission might well have found that the death was caused by the accident. We are not prepared to say that the record does not show that the more probable cause of the coronary occlusion was the breaking away of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Logan-Cache Knitting Mills v. Industrial Commission
... ... affirmed or reversed ... The ... Utah cases are to this effect: Industrial Com. v ... Evans , 52 Utah 394, 174 P. 825; Hardman v ... Ind. Com. , 60 Utah 203, 207 P. 460; Angel ... v. Ind. Com. , 64 Utah 105, 228 P. 509; ... Norris v. Ind. Com. , 90 Utah 256, 61 P.2d ... 413; Holt v. Ind. Com. , 96 Utah 484, 87 ... P.2d 686 ... Most ... courts, however, have held that Commission findings of ... employer-employee relationship, number of employees, etc., ... are binding on the reviewing court unless there ... ...
-
Jones v. California Packing Corporation
...to reject the affirmative testimony of the other doctors which has every appearance of trustworthiness. In Norris v. Industrial Comm., 90 Utah 256, at page 262, 61 P.2d 413, 416, Mr. Chief Justice Wolfe said, 'The evidence contradicting as well as the evidence in favor must have substance.'......
-
Welch v. State
...So. 470; Stockman v. Tremont Lbr. Co., La.App., 155 So. 30; Mercep v. State Ind. Acc. Com., 167 Or. 460, 118 P.2d 1061; Norris v. Ind. Com., 90 Utah 256, 61 P.2d 413; McMahan v. Mut. Ben. Assoc., 28 Wash.2d 202, 182 P.2d 4; Lindeken v. Lowden, 229 Iowa 645, 295 N.W. 112; Michael v. Roberts,......
-
Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Monfredi
...evidence to support its findings, its findings are conclusive upon this court and may not be disturbed. In Norris v. Indus. Comm'n, 90 Utah 256, 260-61, 61 P.2d 413, 415 (1936), the Court defined its function as Where the matter presented on appeal is the question of whether the commission ......