Del Vecchio v. Bowers, No. 37

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtROBERTS
Citation296 U.S. 280,80 L.Ed. 229,56 S.Ct. 190
PartiesDEL VECCHIO et al. v. BOWERS
Decision Date09 December 1935
Docket NumberNo. 37

296 U.S. 280
56 S.Ct. 190
80 L.Ed. 229
DEL VECCHIO et al.

v.

BOWERS.

No. 37.
Argued Nov. 13, 14, 1935.
Decided Dec. 9, 1935.

Page 281

Mr. James E. McCabe, of Washington, D.C., for petitioners.

Mr. John H. Burnett, of Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Mr. Justice ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case involves the application of sections 3(b) and 20(d) of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act,1 to the respondent's claim of compensation for the death of her husband, Jeff Bowers, who died

Page 282

from a bullet wound inflicted while he was on duty in Del Vecchio's store in the District of Columbia.2

Evidence adduced at the hearing before a Deputy Compensation Commissioner tended to establish the following facts: On the morning of September 10, 1931, Bowers discovered a broken fastening on a door leading into an alley in the rear of the premises and engaged a carpenter to make repairs. The latter, while so occupied, hearing a sound like the bursting of an electric light bulb, followed by groans, entered the store and found Bowers lying on the floor. Death ensued without recovery of consciousness. An automatic pistol, owned by the decedent, which he kept in a drawer under a counter, was found in the partly closed drawer. There was blood in the drawer and on the counter near it. The bullet had entered the chest about three and one-half inches to the left of the median line and one inch above the nipple, emerged from the back of the body approximately in line with the point of entrance, and lodged in a paint can on a shelf behind the drawer about five feet above the floor. The ejected shell lay some twelve feet to the left of the drawer where it would naturally fall if the decedent had stood in front of the drawer, between the counter and the shelf, and held the pistol in his right hand pointing at his chest. Ballistic tests traced shell and bullet to the pistol. There were no identifiable finger-prints upon the weapon, but an indistinct print of the side of a finger was discernible. The front of Bowers' shirt bore grains of unburned powder which, with the condition of the material about the hole in the garment, indicated that the muzzle of the weapon had been held within two or three inches of the body. No rags or other material were discovered such as would suggest that Bowers was

Page 283

cleaning the pistol. The victim of such a wound could have taken the few steps from the place where the gun was found to that where his body lay.

The parties agree the injury was self-inflicted, but are in controversy as to whether it was accidental or intentional. According to the respondent's evidence, Bowers was in good health, of a happy disposition, and in good financial condition; his accounts were in order; on the evening before his death he had written to his mother a cheerful letter in which he stated he would soon write her again; and the same evening he had promised a friend to bring him from the store some goods which the friend desired to purchase. The petitioners adduced evidence that Bowers had suffered from an infection of the ear and undergone a mastoid operation; about ten days before his death he visited a specialist to whom he complained of pain in the ear and headaches which seemed to be increasing. He was advised another mastoid operation might be necessary and was sent to a hospital for an X-ray examination. He submitted to the examination, which disclosed the presence of pus in the middle ear, but did not thereafter return to the physician whom he had consulted.

The Deputy Commissioner denied an award of compensation, holding claimant had failed to establish that Bowers' duties required the use of a weapon and there was therefore no showing that his injury arose out of his employment. Upon a bill filed3 the Supreme Court of the District set aside the order, holding the keeping of the pistol in the store, although unknown to the employer, was in furtherance of the latter's interest, the find-

Page 284

ing to the contrary was wholly unsupported, and the evidence tended to prove the death was due to accident. The Court of Appeals concurred in the view that an award should not have been refused on the ground that the injury did not arise out of the employment; but as the case was tried on the theory of suicide, and the Deputy Commissioner had made no finding upon this issue, remanded the cause for further findings.4

The Deputy Commissioner reconsidered the case upon the record as originally made before him and,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
304 practice notes
  • Lafayette v. General Dynamics Corp., (SC 16420)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • April 24, 2001
    ...offers substantial evidence that the injury was not workrelated, the presumption falls out of the case entirely; Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286, 56 S. Ct. 190, 80 L. Ed. 229 (1935); and the administrative judge must weigh all of the evidence in the record. The administrative judge......
  • A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Const. Co., No. 90-1137
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • March 31, 1992
    ...Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 254-55, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 1094-95, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1980); Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286-87, 56 S.Ct. 190, 193-94, 80 L.Ed. 229 (1935). In other words, the evidence must be sufficient to put the existence of a presumed fact ......
  • South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. Bassett, No. 6808.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • June 6, 1939
    ...of you? A. Yes. 2 Commissioner's finding on issues other than jurisdictional are final if supported by evidence: Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 56 S.Ct. 190, 80 L.Ed. 229; Voehl v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 288 U.S. 162, 53 S.Ct. 380, 77 L.Ed. 676, 87 A. L.R. 245; Salmon Bay Sand & Gravel C......
  • Henrietta D. v. Bloomberg, Docket No. 02-7022(L).
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • June 9, 2003
    ...the contrary, we doubt that Congress intended to compel plaintiffs to carry that burden (at least initially). Cf. Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286, 56 S.Ct. 190, 80 L.Ed. 229 (1935) (noting that in workers' compensation cases "the likelihood that testimony as to the cause of death w......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
304 cases
  • Lafayette v. General Dynamics Corp., (SC 16420)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • April 24, 2001
    ...offers substantial evidence that the injury was not workrelated, the presumption falls out of the case entirely; Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286, 56 S. Ct. 190, 80 L. Ed. 229 (1935); and the administrative judge must weigh all of the evidence in the record. The administrative judge......
  • A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Const. Co., No. 90-1137
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • March 31, 1992
    ...Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 254-55, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 1094-95, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1980); Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286-87, 56 S.Ct. 190, 193-94, 80 L.Ed. 229 (1935). In other words, the evidence must be sufficient to put the existence of a presumed fact ......
  • South Chicago Coal & Dock Co. v. Bassett, No. 6808.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • June 6, 1939
    ...of you? A. Yes. 2 Commissioner's finding on issues other than jurisdictional are final if supported by evidence: Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 56 S.Ct. 190, 80 L.Ed. 229; Voehl v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 288 U.S. 162, 53 S.Ct. 380, 77 L.Ed. 676, 87 A. L.R. 245; Salmon Bay Sand & Gravel C......
  • Henrietta D. v. Bloomberg, Docket No. 02-7022(L).
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • June 9, 2003
    ...the contrary, we doubt that Congress intended to compel plaintiffs to carry that burden (at least initially). Cf. Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U.S. 280, 286, 56 S.Ct. 190, 80 L.Ed. 229 (1935) (noting that in workers' compensation cases "the likelihood that testimony as to the cause of death w......
  • 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