Western Oil Drilling Co. v. Snow

• Decision Date: 17 October 1939
• Docket Number: 29087.
• Citation: 94 P.2d 902,185 Okla. 545,1939 OK 414
• Parties: WESTERN OIL DRILLING CO. et al. v. SNOW et al.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

94 P.2d 902

185 Okla. 545, 1939 OK 414

WESTERN OIL DRILLING CO. et al. v. SNOW et al.

No. 29087.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

October 17, 1939

Syllabus by the Court.

Where an injured employee submits to a surgical operation tendered to him by his employer for the purpose of perfecting a cure to restore his earning capacity, such employer is liable for compensation under said Workmen's Compensation Law, 85 Okl.St.Ann. § 1 et seq., for the disability, if any, which may follow as result of said surgical operation regardless of any aggravation of any prior injury or the neglect or unskillfulness or error of judgment of the physician selected by the employer. Skelton Lead & Zinc Co. v. Bagby, 166 Okl. 214, 27 P.2d 168.

Original proceeding in the Supreme Court by the Western Oil Drilling Company, employer, and the National Mutual Casualty Company its insurance carrier, to review an award made by the State Industrial Commission in favor of Charles D. Snow, employee.

Award sustained.

Everett Petry, of Tulsa, for petitioners.

Claud Briggs and John Morrison, both of Oklahoma City, and Mac Q Williamson, Atty. Gen., for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The petitioner, Western Oil Drilling Company, and its insurance carrier seek a review of an award which was made by the State Industrial Commission in favor of the respondent, Charles D Snow.

The record shows the following essential facts: The respondent sustained an accidental personal injury which resulted in a hernia and for which he was awarded an operation to correct the condition and compensation for a period of eight weeks. The petitioner furnished the operation and paid the compensation. The respondent thereupon sought an award under the "other cases" provision of the statute, subd 3, section 13356, O.S.1931, 85 Okl.St.Ann. § 22, subd. 3, on account of disability which he alleged had resulted from the operation which had been performed to correct his hernia. At the hearings conducted on this claim the evidence was in accord with respect to the fact that the operation had corrected the previous hernia condition but was in disagreement with respect to whether it had resulted in an additional disability on the part of the respondent to labor and perform work. The Commission found that the operation had produced such disability and had thereby decreased the wage earning capacity of the respondent and consequently awarded him compensation at the rate of $8 per week, for a period not to exceed three hundred weeks.

The petitioners contend that since hernia is a specific injury that the only award which the Commission could make was one for an operation and eight...