Odom v. Atlantic Oil Producing Co.

• Decision Date: 02 November 1926
• Docket Number: 28113
• Citation: 110 So. 754,162 La. 556
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: ODOM v. ATLANTIC OIL PRODUCING CO. In re ODOM

110 So. 754

162 La. 556

ODOM v. ATLANTIC OIL PRODUCING CO.

In re ODOM

No. 28113

Supreme Court of Louisiana

November 2, 1926

Rehearing Denied November 29, 1926

Amended and affirmed.

Huey P Long and George T. McSween, Jr., both of Shreveport, for applicant.

John B Files, of Shreveport, for respondent.

OVERTON, J. ST. PAUL, J., concurs. O'NIELL, C. J., takes no part.

OPINION

OVERTON, J.

In May, 1925, plaintiff was in the employ of defendant, doing work connected with the drilling of oil wells in the parish of Bossier, and was receiving as compensation $ 31.50 a week. While on a derrick, adjusting a traveling block for defendant, he was jerked and thrown on a wheel, receiving certain injuries as a result. He brought this suit against defendant, under the Employers' Liability Act, to recover compensation for the injuries so received, claiming it in the sum of $ 20 a week for a period of 400 weeks, and also to recover $ 250 for medical, surgical, and hospital expenses.

Plaintiff alleges that the injuries received by him consist of the loss of the first, second, and third fingers of the right hand, which it became necessary to amputate; that they also consist of the mashing and bruising of his hand, which caused injury to his entire right arm and shoulder and the impairment, derangement, and displacement of the nerves, bones, ligaments, muscles, and tissues of his right hand and arm, and that they also consist of the breaking of his nose, the permanent disfigurement of his face and lips, and the loss of three of his lower front teeth.

The Court of Appeal did not find plaintiff's injuries as serious as he alleged them to be. The court says:

"According to the testimony, the net and final result of plaintiff's accident is that he has lost one phalanx of the index finger, the first phalanx, and part of the second phalanx of the second finger, and part of the first phalanx of the third finger. His hand is not otherwise injured, and all his other wounds have healed, and his teeth have been replaced. There is no testimony in the record of any disability to labor, except that which results from the loss of those portions of his fingers, as already described."

The Court of Appeal (Odom v. Atlantic Oil & Producing Co., 4 La.App. 286), in passing on the right to compensation for the loss of the phalanges of the fingers, said:

"Clause (d) of subsection 1 of section 8 of Act 20 of 1914, as amended by Act 216 of 1924, provides compensation for the loss of the fingers and reads in part as follows:

"'The loss of the first phalanx of the thumb, or two phalanges of any finger or toe shall be considered to be equal to the loss of one-half of such members, and the compensation shall be one-half of the amount above specified."

" The statute therefore does not provide compensation for the loss of any part less than two phalanges of any finger except the thumb. As plaintiff has not lost as much as two phalanges of any finger, he is not due any compensation for the injury to the hand, and under the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Fred Bell v. Merchants' Cotton Oil Co., handed down very recently and not yet reported, but which became final on March 1, this year, 160 La. 585, 107 So. 406 [436], he is not entitled to compensation under clause (e) of subsection 1 of section 8 of the statute [relating to the impairment of the usefulness of a member or of any physical function]."

The court then, after expressing the view that the only compensation (not referring to surgical and hospital expenses) that can be allowed plaintiff is for the time he was rendered unable to work, and, in passing on the compensation and the surgical and hospital expenses that should be allowed, said:

"The testimony showsthat immediately following the accident he [plaintiff] was sent to a sanitarium where he remained for 26 days. At the end of that time he was sent to his home where he was treated by a physician until July 4 or 5, when he was discharged. He was, therefore, in the sanitarium and under the treatment of a physician for approximately seven weeks. The court [trial court] awarded him compensation for total disability for ten weeks at $ 20 per week and gave credit for the amount paid, which was $ 200. Under the law that is as much as he was entitled to receive. He was also awarded $ 250 for medical expenses under subsection 5 of section 8 of the act [Act 216 of 1924] which provides that:

"'The employer shall in every case coming under this act furnish the employee reasonable medical, surgical and hospital services and medicines not to exceed two hundred and fifty dollars in value. * * *'

"It is admitted that defendant paid the sanitarium bill amounting to $ 98.50, and the bill of the dentist amounting to $ 100, a total of $ 198.50.

"But it is in evidence that plaintiff incurred other medical expenses amounting to more than the difference between the amount paid by defendant and the sum due under the compensation statute as awarded by the court. Therefore the defendant is due the plaintiff the balance of $ 51.50."

We think that the Court of...