Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Fulton

CourtTexas Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtHiggins
CitationPetroleum Casualty Co. v. Fulton, 63 S.W.2d 1068 (Tex. App. 1933)
Decision Date28 September 1933
Docket NumberNo. 2875.,2875.
PartiesPETROLEUM CASUALTY CO. v. FULTON.

Appeal from District Court, Crane County; J. A. Drane, Judge.

Suit by Dean Fulton against the Petroleum Casualty Company to set aside a ruling of the Industrial Accident Board denying plaintiff's claim for compensation. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Reversed and rendered.

Henry G. Russell, of Pecos, and Knox W. Gilmore, of Houston, for appellant.

J. B. Cotten, of Crane, and Hill D. Hudson, of Pecos, for appellee.

HIGGINS, Justice.

This is a suit by Fulton against appellant to set aside an adverse ruling of the Industrial Accident Board upon a compensation claim for accidental injury received by Fulton in the course of his employment by the Humble Pipe Line Company. Upon favorable findings by a jury judgment was rendered awarding compensation to Fulton as for total permanent incapacity.

On October 9, 1930, while in the course of his employment, Fulton was accidentally "gassed," in consequence of which pulmonary tuberculosis later developed. The claim for compensation is based upon this accident.

The accident occurred October 9, 1930. Notice was given appellee's employer the next day. Claim for compensation was not filed with the board until January 22, 1932. Section 4a of article 8307 requires that a claim for compensation with respect to an injury must be made within six months after the occurrence of the same. It further provides that for good cause, in meritorious cases, the board may waive strict compliance with respect to the six months' limitation.

A claimant, who fails to file his claim with the board within the six months' period, must show good cause for such failure, not merely during the first six months, but continuing up to the time the claim is filed. Holloway v. Texas Indemnity Ins. Company (Tex. Com. App.) 40 S.W.(2d) 75; Ocean A. & G. Corp. v. Pruitt (Tex. Com. App.) 58 S.W. (2d) 41; New Amsterdam, etc., Co. v. Scott, 54 S.W.(2d) 175.

In behalf of appellant it is urged the evidence is wholly insufficient to show that good cause for delay in filing the claim continued up to the date of filing, and that this is particularly true of the period between December 15, 1931, and January 22, 1932.

Appellee's testimony, on direct examination, was to the effect that the inhalation of the gas immediately caused a severe irritation of his eyes, nose, and throat; made him sick at the stomach, nervous, and he was unable to work the next day. The stomach nausea continued for about a week and the throat irritation bothered him for about fifteen days. Shortly after October 9th, he observed a change in his physical condition and ability to work.

"Q. How soon after October 9th was it when you began to observe these changes? A. Well it wasn't so very long after I felt weak and sick, and never did feel the same, and I kept getting dragier and dragier, and finally seemed like I got tired and never got rested.

"Q. You layed off from work because you were sick on July 18th, 1931? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. What was the matter with you? How did you feel? A. I just had that awful tired feeling, and hurt through my chest, and under my shoulder blades—it's hard to explain just how I did feel.

"Q. Did you have a physician? A. Yes, sir, I had a high temperature, in fact I didn't know anything and about eight o'clock the wife got a Doctor.

"Q. Prior to July 18th, 1931, Mr. Fulton had you—and after October 9th, had you had to lay off on account of sickness? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. How many days? A. About four days I believe at one time.

"Q. Do you remember about when? A. Just before 1931.

"Q. What was your condition at that time? A. Well I began coughing, and just had that tired feeling—that was just before Christmas in 1930."

July 18, 1931, he became acutely ill, and on July 26, 1931, was advised by the doctor he had tuberculosis. He remained at home until February 6, 1932, when he went to the State Tubercular Sanitarium at Carlsbad, where he remained until October. After he became acutely ill on July 18, 1931, appellee testified he was in bed most of the time and unable to conduct any business; that he conferred with an attorney, Mr. Cotten, in December, 1931; that his wife took him to Crane to see Mr. Cotten.

"Q. Mr. Fulton why hadn't you filed a claim prior to January 16th, 1932? A. I didn't know what proceedings to take."

It appears the claim was prepared for filing on January 16, 1932.

"Q. You say that you didn't know the proceedings. Had you made any effort to consult anybody prior to the time you filed your suit? A. I talked to some friends of mine that came to see me before I got able to come down here.

"Q. Why didn't you come here prior to January 16th, 1932? A. I wasn't able to make the trip.

"Q. Why weren't you able? A. I was sick.

"Q. Then it is your testimony that on January 16th, 1932, for the first time you were able to come over and consult your Attorney and file your claim? Is that your testimony? A. Yes, sir."

On cross-examination appellee testified substantially as follows: At the request of his wife, Mr. Cotten came to see him in December, 1931, but he did not turn the claim over to him at that time.

"Q. Why didn't you, Mr. Fulton? A. Well I don't know for what reason I didn't; I just didn't feel like fooling with it; I was all in, and didn't feel mentally able to fool with it."

After July 18th until December 18, 1931, he drew three months' sick benefits from his employer.

"Q. Now from July 18th, 1931, up until February 6th, 1932, you were at home? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. Up and about the place at times and in bed at times? A. In bed most all of the time.

"Q. You came to the Humble Office several times during that period? A. Yes sir I came there to get my check every pay period. * * *

"Q. You knew you had to file your claim for compensation and had to give notice of your injury—you have been with them and seen them file them? A. I have never been with anybody when they filed a claim.

"Q. Did you ever hear of it? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. You talked to Mr. Cotten and sent for him for this particular purpose? A. Yes sir.

"Q. And then you didn't file any claim? A. No sir because I wasn't able to get here.

"Q. You didn't authorize Mr. Cotten to file it? A. No sir.

"Q. He told you that if you got compensation you would have to file a claim? A. Yes sir.

"Q. Yet you let it go until the 16th of January? A. It was that time before I was able to come over here.

"Q. You were well enough to go to the office and get these checks all during that period? A. No sir not all during that period.

"Q. You made several trips to the office didn't you? A. No sir not every trip.

"Q. How many? A. I was there two or three different times.

"Q. How many trips did you make to the Grocery store? A. I didn't go to the Grocery store. Wait a minute, yes, I did.

"Q. How many times? A. Not very many.

"Q. About how many? A. I don't suppose over three or four times.

"Q. About when was that, do you know? A. Sometime just before my wife brought me down here.

"Q. Down to Mr. Cotten? A. Yes sir.

"Q. How many months before that? A. Not months, just a few days.

"Q. In August did you go out of the house any? A. Yes, go out and lay on the lawn every evening.

"Q. Did you go to town any? A. Once in a while my wife would get me in the car and drive me to town; Dr. Agnew said it would be good for me.

"Q. Did you make any trips to Dr. Agnew's office from July 18th, until February 6th? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. Several? A. No sir not several; I made two or three different trips I guess.

"Q. In September did you go to the Grocery store, or down to the office or go to the Humble Office? A. I don't remember.

"Q. You wouldn't say you didn't? A. Nope.

"Q. In October—how about October? A. I was at the office in October.

"Q. In October, 1931? A. Yes, sir.

"Q. How many times? A. I don't know.

"Q. Can you give us an idea? A. I might have been in there a couple of times in October.

"Q. Your wife was there with you at home all of the time wasn't she? A. Yes sir.

"Q. You ...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Johnson v. Employers Liability Assur. Corporation
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • January 26, 1938
    ...Co. (Tex. Com.App.) 40 S.W.2d 75; Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation v. Pruitt (Tex. Com.App.) 58 S.W.2d 41; Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Fulton (Tex.Civ.App.) 63 S.W. 2d 1068; Durham v. Texas Indemnity Ins. Co. (Tex.Civ.App.) 60 S.W.2d 255; Texas Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Williamson (Tex.Civ.......
  • Hayes v. Commercial Standard Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • April 12, 1940
    ...Tex.Civ.App., 110 S.W.2d 258; Durham v. Texas Indemnity Ins. Co., Tex. Civ.App., 60 S.W.2d 255, writ dismissed; Petroleum Cas. Co. v. Fulton, Tex.Civ. App., 63 S.W.2d 1068; Maryland Cas. Co. v. Johnson, Tex.Civ.App., 87 S.W.2d 342, writ dismissed, and such similar There is yet another reaso......
  • Pacific Emp. Ins. Co. v. Brannon
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • July 18, 1951
    ... ... ', the court below evidently did not mean that further orders were contemplated, as in Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Lewis, Tex.Civ.App., 63 S.W.2d 1066, er. [150 Tex. 447] ref. Nor could it properly ... ...