Wright v. Louisiana Ice & Utilities Co

• Decision Date: 08 December 1931
• Docket Number: 878
• Citation: 19 La.App. 173,138 So. 450
• Parties: WRIGHT v. LOUISIANA ICE & UTILITIES CO
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

138 So. 450

19 La.App. 173

WRIGHT v. LOUISIANA ICE & UTILITIES CO

No. 878

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, First Circuit

December 8, 1931

Rehearing Refused February 8, 1932.

Writs of Certiorari and Review Refused by Supreme Court March 30 1932.

Appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge. Hon. George K. Favrot, Judge.

Action by Virginia Wright against Louisiana Ice & Utilities Company.

There was judgment for plaintiff and defendant appealed.

Judgment affirmed.

Benton & Benton, of Baton Rouge, attorneys for plaintiff, appellee.

Thomas J. Martin, of New Orleans, attorney for defendant, appellant.

OPINION

MOUTON J.

This case was remanded by us to the district court for trial.

Defendant filed an exception of no cause or right of action to the amended and supplemental petition of the plaintiff.

His grounds of exception are that plaintiff has failed to allege that the death of plaintiff's husband arose out of and in the course of his employment, and that he was engaged in a hazardous trade or business.

In our original opinion the ruling was against these contentions of defendant, and which are therefore without merit.

The exception being disposed of, we will now pass to the consideration of the merits of the case.

John Wright, deceased husband of plaintiff, was employed by defendant company to deliver ice to its customers in the city of Baton Rouge. After delivering a block of ice to one of these customers, about noon, August 19, 1929, Wright suddenly collapsed, and died immediately.

Plaintiff brings this suit for compensation under the Employers' Liability Act.

No autopsy was made of the deceased. Four physicians, Bird, Lorio, Tucker and Jones testified as experts at the trial. They all agreed that without an autopsy the cause of death could not be positively ascertained. From the information obtained by them of the history of the case, these physicians differed, however, widely in reference to the cause of Wright's death.

Drs. Bird and Lorio ascribed it to acute dilation of the heart. Dr. Tucker said evidently he had a heart lesion, and died from rupture of the coronary artery that feeds the heart, while Dr. Jones was of the opinion that his death was caused by cerebral hemorrhage.

They agree, however, that the diseased condition of the heart of deceased existed prior to his sudden death, although he might have been unaware of it; also, that physical exertion or overstraining was "hard" on his heart and had a deleterious effect. In alluding to the hardening of Wright's artery, to which Dr. Jones, expert for defendant, refers, he says that any sort of strain, a cup of coffee or tea, boisterous laughter, or any emotional disturbance is bad for a person suffering with his arteries in that condition.

It is shown by the testimony of the physicians that a person suffering from a damaged heart, as explained by them, by carefully guarding against physical labor or exertion may prolong his period of life for a long time.

Dr. Tucker, testifying for defendant, in referring to rupture of the artery next to the heart which he thought was the cause of Wright's death, said if a person in that condition followed his instructions he might live "indefinitely," or, as we understand his answer, the normal span of life.

The other physicians were likewise of the same opinion, if a person lived a quiet and sedate life and abstained from physical labor or overexertion, though he might be suffering from a weakness, disability, or disease of the heart, to which they referred in their testimony.

It is shown that deceased had started about six on the morning to deliver ice on the day of his death. The ice was delivered in blocks weighing, twelve, twenty-five, fifty, and one hundred pounds. Up to the noon hour of that day, about the time he succumbed, he delivered at different places five thousand and one hundred pounds of ice. He had for assistant in the delivery of the ice, Dean Brown, a boy helper, who says he never carried blocks of one hundred pounds, but sometimes helped Wright in carrying those of that size. It must be inferred from that statement that sometimes Brown did not assist him in carrying these one hundred pound blocks which Brown says Wright carried on his shoulders. Evidently Wright was overstraining himself, else he would not have required the assistance of his helper in moving the heavy blocks of ice.

Wright died in the kitchen of Mrs. Kahn's residence, where Sarah Spand was working as a servant. Sarah testifies that Wright seemed to be very warm, was perspiring profusely, and that his clothes were wet with perspiration. All of that indicated considerable exertion on his part, and which is not at all surprising when it is considered he had delivered before the noon hour of that day five thousand and one hundred pounds of ice, in blocks varying in weight from twelve to one hundred pounds, with the help of a boy as his assistant. In the light of that testimony and the accompanying facts and circumstances to which we have referred, the only logical conclusion that can be reached is that Wright overexerted or overstrained himself, considering the pre-existing condition of his heart, which brought about its acute dilation, which we think the preponderance of the evidence shows, or a rupture of the coronary artery, or cerebral hemorrhage, causing his death.

In the case of Becton v. Deas Paving Co., 3 La.App. 683, the court said:

"When an injured employee works in excessive heat which caused an enlargement and dilation of the heart which rendered the heart unable to properly function, it was an 'accident' within meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Act defined by Section 38 of Act 20 of 1914."

Here whether there was a dilation of the heart, rupture of the coronary artery, or cerebral hemorrhage, it was an...