Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Fulton
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | Higgins |
| Citation | Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Fulton, 63 S.W.2d 1068 (Tex. App. 1933) |
| Decision Date | 28 September 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 2875.,2875. |
| Parties | PETROLEUM 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.
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.
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.
It appears the claim was prepared for filing on January 16, 1932.
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.
After July 18th until December 18, 1931, he drew three months' sick benefits from his employer.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your Free Trial
-
Johnson v. Employers Liability Assur. Corporation
...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.
...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
... ... ', 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 ... ...