Runyan v. Lockwood Graders, Inc.
| Decision Date | 20 March 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 35656,35656 |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
| Parties | Ned A. RUNYAN, Appellant, v. LOCKWOOD GRADERS, INC., a Corporation and Globe Indemnity Company, a Corporation, Appellees. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Under section 48-121, R.R.S.1943, of the workmen's compensation law, where an injury is to the finger or fingers only, and the effect of such injury is the usual and natural one, the compensation must be fixed upon the basis of the loss of use of such finger or fingers, and not upon the basis of the loss of use of the hand.
2. Where the workmen's compensation law fixes the amount of compensation, such compensation can be measured only in the manner directed by the statute.
3. It was the intent of the Legislature in establishing a schedule of benefits for the specific injuries listed in subdivision (3) of section 48-121, R.R.S. 1943, to fix the amount of such benefits without regard to the extent of the subsequent disability with respect to the particular work or industry in which the employee was engaged at the time of his injury.
4. Where an employee has suffered a schedule injury to some particular member or members and some unusual and extraordinary condition develops therefrom as a result thereof, which condition adversely affects some other member or the body itself, an increased award is proper and should be made to cover such additional disability.
5. An injury to a finger or fingers only is not an injury to a member within the meaning of subdivision (3) of section 48-121, R.R.S.1943, providing for an award of total and permanent disability for the loss of two members as listed therein.
6. The workmen's compensation law creates a statutory liability and, although the law will be construed liberally to accomplish its beneficent purposes, the courts will not construe its plain and unequivocal meaning, or apply equitable principles thereto to alleviate any apparent harshness in the result provided by the controlling provisions of the statute.
Holtorf, Hansen & Fitzke, Alfred J. Kortum, Gering, for appellant.
Wright, Simmons & Hancock, Scottsbluff, for appellees.
Heard before WHITE, C. J., and CARTER, MESSMORE, YEAGER, SPENCER, BOSLAUGH, and BROWER, JJ.
This is an action to recover benefits under the workmen's compensation law for injuries sustained by Ned A. Runyan, which arose out of and in the course of his employment by Lockwood Graders, Inc. The district court held that the injuries constituted a schedule loss under the provisions of subdivision (3) of section 48-121, R.R.S.1943, and awarded benefits as provided in such section. The plaintiff contends that his injuries were totally and permanently disabling and that he is entitled to benefits under the provisions of subdivision (1) of section 48-121, R.R.S.1943, relating to injuries resulting in two-member losses. From the adverse ruling on his contention the plaintiff has appealed.
On May 14, 1962, the date of the accident, plaintiff was in the employ of Lockwood Graders, Inc. He was engaged in operating a hydraulic press used in crimping the edges of sheet metal in forming shields for a harvester. The press was equipped with a large blade which descended with great pressure and made the desired form. While plaintiff was centering the sheet metal, preparatory to the operation of the hydraulic press, he inadvertently stepped on the foot treadle, which started the blade downward. The blade crushed the middle phalanges of the four fingers of the left hand and the middle phalanges and one or more of the proximal interphalangeal joints of the four fingers of the right hand. As a result of the accident the middle finger of the right hand and the middle and ring fingers of the left hand were amputated. The remaining fingers of both hands suffered compound fractures, and a crushing of tendons and blood vessels, causing permanent stiffness, deformity, and poor circulation. The medical evidence sustains a finding that plaintiff suffered a total loss of the use of all eight fingers. There is evidence that the injuries to the fingers were such as to totally incapacitate the plaintiff from performing any work similar to that which he was able to perform previous to the accident. For the purposes of this opinion we will assume that plaintiff has suffered a total and permanent disability insofar as his earning capacity is concerned.
Plaintiff does not contend that the award of the district court is erroneous if the schedule loss provision of subdivision (3) of section 48-121, R.R.S.1943, is the controlling statutory provision. Plaintiff's appeal is based solely on his contention that the two-member injury provision should apply with a resulting award for total and permanent disability.
Subdivision (3) of section 48-121, R.R.S.1943, as it relates to two-member injuries provides: 'The loss of both hands, or both arms, or both feet, or both legs, or both eyes, or of any two thereof, shall constitute total and permanent disability and be compensated for according to the provisions of subdivision (1) of this section.' It will be noted that the loss of a finger, or any number of them, is not treated as a loss of a member in the section of the statute providing for total and permanent disability for the loss of two members.
It is the contention of the plaintiff that the loss of eight fingers is in fact the loss of two members on the principle announced by the New York court in Dowling v. Church E. Gates & Co., 253 N.Y. 108, 170 N.E. 511, which we approved in Ottens v. Western Contracting Co., 139 Neb. 78, 296 N.W. 431, 299 N.W. 226, and Haler v. Gering Bean Co., 163 Neb. 748, 81 N.W.2d 152. The rule stated in these cases is: Where an employee has suffered a schedule injury to some particular member or members and some unusual and extraordinary condition develops therefrom as a result thereof, which condition affects some other member or the body itself, an increase award is proper and should be made to cover such additional disability. We adhere to this rule and we are now confronted with the factual question as to whether or not other members, or the body as a whole, were affected by some unusual and extraordinary condition that would require application of the rule.
The general tenor of the medical testimony is that the loss of a finger is injurious to the functional use of the hand, the arm, and even the body as a whole. This view is based on the theory that an injury to a component part is injurious to the whole of which it is a part. That this is true as a general proposition cannot be questioned, whether or not there is an unusual or extraordinary condition present. But the workmen's compensation law disregards this theory in favor of an arbitrary distinction between injuries to fingers, the hand, or the arm. Subdivision (3)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spiker v. John Day Co.
...for plaintiff to force us into strained interpretations of our statutes and case law. As was cautioned in Runyan v. Lockwood Graders, Inc., 176 Neb. 676, 127 N.W.2d 186 (1964): "The result of the instant case appears to be a harsh one. But this court is bound by the statute as enacted. It h......
-
Bassinger v. Nebraska Heart Hosp.
...404, 476 N.W.2d 559 (1991). FN33. Burns v. Nielsen, 273 Neb. 724, 735, 732 N.W.2d 640, 650 (2007). 34. See Runyan v. Lockwood Graders, Inc., 176 Neb. 676, 127 N.W.2d 186 (1964). ...
-
Jeffers v. Pappas Trucking, Inc.
...of the employee." Burrious v. North Platte Packing Co., 182 Neb. 122, 153 N.W.2d 353 (1967). See, also, Runyan v. Lockwood Graders, Inc., 176 Neb. 676, 127 N.W.2d 186 (1964). There is, however, an exception to this rule. Where "an employee has suffered a schedule injury to some particular m......
-
Broderson v. Federal Chemical Co.
...Neb. 402, 215 N.W.2d 92 (1974); Burrious v. North Platte Packing Co., 182 Neb. 122, 153 N.W.2d 353 (1967); Runyan v. Lockwood Graders, Inc., 176 Neb. 676, 127 N.W.2d 186 (1964). There is an exception to the rule. Where an employee has suffered a schedule injury to some particular member or ......