Raines v. City of St. Louis, 50540

Citation711 S.W.2d 544
Decision Date20 May 1986
Docket NumberNo. 50540,50540
PartiesHarold RAINES, deceased, Dorothy Raines, Widow, et al., Claimants-Appellants, v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Employer-Respondent.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Rita M. Montgomery, St. Louis, for claimants-appellants.

James J. Wilson, City Counselor, Robert H. Dierker, Jr., Timothy G. Noble, Associate City Counselors, St. Louis, for employer-respondent.

CARL R. GAERTNER, Presiding Judge.

Claimants, the widow and the unemanicipated children of decedent employee, appeal from an award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying them worker's compensation death benefits. Respondent employer, the City of St. Louis, moves to dismiss the appeal asserting claimants have failed to comply with Rule 84.04, which prescribes the content of appellate briefs. That claimants have failed to comply with Rule 84.04 in several material respects is undeniable. Their statement of facts and their points relied upon are not even marginally acceptable. Nevertheless, we deny respondent's motion in the interests of judicial economy and dispose of the appeal on its merits.

Claimant's decedent was a maintenance worker employed by the City of St. Louis Water Department. While performing his regular duties he suffered a heart attack and died. An autopsy revealed the attack was incident to atherosclerotic heart disease. Though claimants did not deny decedent had a pre-existing heart condition, they asserted the precipitating or immediate cause of the fatal attack was the physical stress of turning a water main valve. Claimants' evidence that decedent's heart attack was work-induced did not persuade the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission. Accordingly, claimants were denied worker's compensation death benefits.

Whether decedent's heart attack was induced by the strain of labor was a question of fact which the Commission resolved adversely to claimants. Because the power to judge the credibility of witnesses, to resolve conflicts in testimony, to weigh evidence, and to draw factual inferences is vested in the Commission as trier of fact, our role in reviewing the Commission's award is limited. We examine the record in the light most favorable to the award. If we find the award is supported by competent and substantial evidence, we do not disturb it. Dillard v. City of St. Louis, 685 S.W.2d 918 (Mo.App.1984).

The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Hampton v. Big Boy Steel Erection
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 9 Diciembre 2003
    ...French v. Ford Motor Co., 720 S.W.2d 24 (Mo.App.1986); Jones v. Concordia Pub. House, 712 S.W.2d 60 (Mo.App.1986); Raines v. City of St. Louis, 711 S.W.2d 544 (Mo.App.1986); Westerhold v. Unitog-Holden Mfg. Co., 707 S.W.2d 456 (Mo.App. 1986); Sims v. Bestway Cleaning Co., 701 S.W.2d 791 (Mo......
  • Gray v. White
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 7 Diciembre 1999
    ...to review an appeal on the merits even when the statement of facts and points relied on are not acceptable. Raines v. City of St. Louis, 711 S.W.2d 544, 544 (Mo. App. E.D. 1986). We will not exercise our discretion to dismiss an appeal for technical deficiency under Rule 84.04 unless the de......
  • Kasl v. Bristol Care, Inc.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 9 Febrero 1999
    ...427, 428-29 (Mo.App.1987); Hutchinson v. Tri-State Motor Transit Co., 721 S.W.2d 158, 162-63 (Mo.App.1986); Raines v. City of St. Louis, 711 S.W.2d 544, 544 (Mo.App.1986); Ford Motor Co. v. Dickens, 700 S.W.2d 484, 486-87 (Mo.App.1985); Tibbs v. Rowe Furniture Corp., 691 S.W.2d 410, 412 (Mo......
  • Hutchinson v. Tri-State Motor Transit Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 7 Noviembre 1986
    ...benefits. In other heart attack cases the record has supported the award of the commission denying death benefits. Raines v. City of St. Louis, 711 S.W.2d 544 (Mo.App.1986); Staab v. Laclede Gas Co., 691 S.W.2d 343 In Staab the employee, a dump truck driver, was observed standing on the run......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT