Orange County Bd. of County Com'rs v. Brenemen, 39059

• Decision Date: 01 April 1970
• Docket Number: No. 39059,39059
• Citation: 233 So.2d 377
• Parties: ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Petitioner, v. Gladys D. BRENEMEN and the Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Labor and Employment Opportunities, Bureau of Workmen's Compensation, Respondents.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

Page 377

233 So.2d 377

ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Petitioner, v. Gladys D. BRENEMEN and the Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Labor and Employment Opportunities, Bureau of Workmen's Compensation, Respondents.

No. 39059.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1, 1970.

Rehearing Denied April 22, 1970.

Gary L. Stump, of Whittaker, Pyle & Wood, Orlando, for petitioner.

Charles C. Hurt, of Edward H. Hurt, P. A., Orlando, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

BOYD, Justice.

This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review the Order of the Florida Industrial Relations Commission affirming the award of death benefits. The Judge of Industrial Claims and the Full Commission, one member dissenting, found that the activities of the employee on the afternoon of October 9, 1967, resulted in stress and anxiety which elevated his blood pressure causing transient hypertension which in turn acted upon a congenital weakness in the employee's cerebral vascular system and resulted in his death on October 17, 1967.

The facts as stated in the Order of the Judge of Industrial Claims and of the Full Commission are as follows:

'The deceased employee was an assistant warden employed by the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, Florida. His usual duties consisted of the supervising of the guards at the prison camp, the assigning of work crews, the arranging for the admittance and discharge of prisoners, and the keeping of certain records. Although he was not generally called upon to engage in any manual labor, occasionally he would transport a prisoner to the courthouse and would, as the need presented, assist in the capture of an escaped prisoner.

'On the morning of October 9, 1967, the employee arrived at his employment at the usual hour, somewhere around 4:45 A.M. The events of the day proceeded uneventfully until 2:20 P.M. that afternoon when two prisoners escaped. The deceased employee was notified, and along with the prison's dog handler, he drove to the scene of the escape in an air conditioned stationwagon, accompanied by another guard and a trustee (sic), and set out to capture the two escapees. The site of the escape was approximately 30 to 40 minutes from the prison and at the site the deceased employee discharged the guard, the trustee (sic) and the dogs in the immediate area and commenced circling the search area, sometimes traveling over unpaved areas, but generally traveling upon paved and improved areas, until the escapes were sighted and placed into custody.

'The employee then returned to the prison camp arriving around 4:00 P.M. Upon arriving, the employee indicated to another guard that he was suffering from an awful pain and that it was his feeling that same was caused by the fact that he was unable to urinate as needed during the search for the two escapees.

'He left the prison camp and returned home where he was found by his wife leaning against a refrigerator, with a whitened face, sweating profusely and looking quite ill.

'Shortly thereafter, the employee was transported to the hospital where ultimately there was diagnosed that the employee had suffered an intracranial hemorrhage. The employee continued to live, although in very critical condition, until October 17, 1967.'

The employer-carrier contended that at no time during the course of the afternoon did the employee sustain an accident as contemplated by the Workmen's Compensation Act and further that there is no causal relationship between the employee's activities on October 9 and his death occurring on October 17, 1967.

The Judge of Industrial Claims found that the action of stress and anxiety which elevated the employee's blood pressure causing transient hypertension and ultimately resulting in an intracranial hemorrhage resulting in his death, constituted an accident and further that this 'accident' arose out of and in the course of his employment. The Full Commission affirmed with one member dissenting on the grounds that claimant had failed to prove a causal...