Soderquist v. McGough Bros.
| Decision Date | 10 April 1941 |
| Docket Number | 32752. |
| Citation | 297 N.W. 565,210 Minn. 123 |
| Parties | SODERQUIST v. McGOUGH BROS. et al. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Certiorari to Industrial Commission.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Mason's Minn.St.1927, § 4272-1 et seq., by Raymond Soderquist claimant, opposed by McGough Brothers, employer, and the Hardware Mutual Casualty Company, insurance carrier. To review an award of the Industrial Commission denying a petition for the vacation of a referee's award and for a rehearing to determine the extent of permanent disability and traumatic neurosis, claimant brings certiorari.
Order vacated, and proceeding remanded for rehearing.
Syllabus by the Court .
On the record before us the relator is conclusively entitled to further compensation, and the case is remanded for rehearing.
Leslie S. High, of Duluth, for relator.
Reynolds & McLeod, of Minneapolis, for respondents.
Certiorari to the Industrial Commission to review its order of September 26, 1940, denying relator's petition for the vacation of the referee's award of October 3, 1938, and for a rehearing to determine the extent of permanent disability and traumatic neurosis.
October 21, 1937, relator was employed by respondent McGough Brothers, who were insured for workmen's compensation with the respondent Hardware Mutual Casualty Company. On that date relator suffered an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment when the roof floor of a building on which he was working collapsed and he fell 76 feet to the ground floor. He suffered numerous bodily bruises and contusions, a fracture of the left scapula, fractures of the second and third vertabrae, and alleged permanent back injuries and associated mental fears classified as traumatic neurosis.
August 18, 1938, relator filed a petition with the Industrial Commission alleging permanent partial disability due to back injuries and nervous condition and sought an award of such compensation as is provided by the Compensation Act admitting the receipt of $616 compensation benefits. The joint answer of the employer and insurer allege that the date of relator's recovery from the accident without permanent disability was June 23, 1938. Upon the testimony of expert witnesses who treated relator, the effect of which was that he had made a complete recovery as far as the fractures were concerned and suffered only a temporary total...
To continue reading
Request your trial