Parkel v. Union Pac. Coal Co.
| Decision Date | 27 November 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 2511,2511 |
| Citation | 237 P.2d 634,69 Wyo. 122 |
| Parties | PARKEL, v. UNION PAC. COAL CO. |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Albert E. Nelson, Kenneth G. Hamm, Rock Springs, for appellant.
Edwin V. Magagna, Joseph H. Galicich, Rock Springs, for respondent.
This is a workmen's compensation case in which John F. Parkel is the claimant. He contends that he is entitled to the sum of $90 for temporary disability sustained while he was in the employ as a coal miner for the Union Pacific Coal Company from October 4, 1948 to November 10, 1948. The employer contends that the claimant sustained no injury and is consequently not entitled to any sum of money whatever. The trial court evidently agreed with the contention of the employer and denied the claimant any compensation and the latter has appealed to this court.
On October 6, 1948, Dr. K. E. Krueger of Rock Springs notified Charles Grosso, Mine Superintendent of the employer herein, that the claimant herein reported for treatment on that day stating that he was injured on October 4, 1948 and sustained a sprained back. The mine superintendent endorsed upon this notice the fact that Parkel did not report any injury to any supervisor. No report of any accident was filed by the employer. But the employee on November 9, 1948 filed a claim for temporary disability claiming that: The employee was discharged by the physician as cured on November 10, 1948. The claimant in the trial of this case testified that he and two others carried a swivel, that is to say, a piece of machinery, from the face of the mine down to the loading point; that the swivel weighed between 400 to 700 pounds; that while they were thus carrying the swivel he got a sharp pain in his back; that he had had an injury to the back sometime previously; that he told at the time to those working with him, namely one Crowe and one Ed Dunn that he was hurt and that he also reported that to George Fabiny who was a unit foreman or what is called a 'pusher'; that he reported to Dr. Krueger and was under his care until given a release on November 10, 1948; and that he returned to work on the 13th day of November, 1948. Claimant also attempted to get the matter adjusted through the local union but apparently the attempt in that direction resulted in nothing and the proceeding herein was thereupon brought to trial. Dr. Krueger testified that he treated the claimant during the time above mentioned; that the claimant reported to him that he had a sprained back. He testified in part as follows:
Testimony in connection with the claimed injury was given on behalf of the employer by Ed Dunn, a retired coal miner, and apparently therefore an unprejudiced witness, and by George Fabiny, the unit foreman above mentioned. Dunn stated that he worked with the claimant at the time mentioned; that the swivel which the claimant contended to have weighed between 400 and 700 pounds, in fact did not weigh more than 150 pounds; that the swivel was small; that the three of them carried it; that Parkel said when they got to the bottom of the air course 'Let's put it down, wait until we get some more help'; that claimant stated that he had been hurt once before, but so far as the occasion mentioned was concerned he stated 'I didn't know anything about anybody getting hurt'; that claimant did not say at that time that he was hurt. The witness George Fabiny testified that he directed the work of claimant; that he instructed him and those with him to take a swivel up to the face of the mine; that it was not taken up; 'When I got back, I went up and asked him (the claimant) how come the swivel wasn't moved. He said he wasn't going to take it up. That is when I told him to see the boss, if he didn't want to follow orders.
'Q. Did Mr. Parkel, at that time, state to you that he had been hurt on that day? A. Absolutely not.
'Q. This swivel that you were referring to, about how much did that swivel weigh? A. This type of swivel is the smaller one--between 90 and 125, not over 150 at the most.
'Q. Isn't it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hardison, In re
...seek medical attention until he voluntarily terminated his employment. Wilson v. Holly Sugar Corporation, supra; Parkel v. Union Pac. Coal Co., 69 Wyo. 122, 237 P.2d 634, 635. For the reasons stated we are constrained to hold that there was not sufficient evidence tending to establish by mo......
-
Phillip v. State
...invoke the falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus maxim—which translated is "false in one thing, false in all." Parkel v. Union Pac. Coal Co., 69 Wyo. 122, 128, 237 P.2d 634, 636 (Wyo.1951). Under the maxim, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, as strictly interpreted, if a witness testifies falsely......
-
Dougherty v. J.W. Williams, Inc., 90-174
...clear that the finder of fact need not accept the statements of the claimant as to the causal relationship. Parkel v. Union Pacific Coal Co., 69 Wyo. 122, 237 P.2d 634 (1951). It is obvious from the record that Dougherty wanted to rely upon the testimony of Gail Brown to fill this gap and e......
-
Urlaub v. Urlaub
...fact must reject all of the testimony unless that testimony is strongly corroborated by other evidence, citing Parkel v. Union Pac. Coal Co., 69 Wyo. 122, 237 P.2d 634 (1951); 4. Once the testimony is found to be false, the remainder of the witness's testimony may be rejected unless corrobo......