Cabrera v. Industrial Commission

85 P.R. 54
Supreme Court of Puerto Rico·Decided March 16, 1962·No. No. 557·Published

Opinion

Mr. Justice Santana Becerra

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The workman Ismael Meléndez Mateo suffered a fall from the roof of a house at an altitude of approximately 12 feet while he was working. The accident occurred on August 31, 1956. That same day he was hospitalized and on September 18 he was discharged by the State Insurance Fund. On October 1, the Fund confirmed said discharge and the workman appealed to the Commission alleging that he could not work. He was examined at a medical hearing on October 22 and on that date the Fund considered him cured without any disability. On November 13 he was again examined at a medical hearing and the case was sent to the Fund for new X-rays of the thorax. He was again examined on November 14 and on November 23, 1956 the Commission decided that the workman had been cured without any disability. Three and one half months later, on March 16, 1957 he died. He was 49 years of age.

The State Insurance Fund denied compensation to his widow and to other dependents on May 1, 1958. On August 29, 1958 the respondent Commission passed judgment affirming the Manager and denying compensation for this death. This judgment is now before our consideration.

There is no dispute as to the dependency. Neither is there any controversy as to the fact that the workman, a [57] mason by trade, buffered the fall from the roof of that house during the course of his employment with the Fullana Construction Corporation. The ease revolves fundamentally on the causal relation between the death and the labor accident. In this proceeding petitioners attack the conclusion of the respondent Commission, based on the medical evidence, to the effect that the death had nothing to do with the accident. It it indispensable, therefore, that we make a detailed exposition of the evidence in the record.

Dr. Andrés Meléndez testified that the workman was hospitalized in his clinic, having been sent by the practitioner José Santana on August 31, 1956 — the day of the accident —because of the numerous contusions that he had received in his head, thoracic region, right hip, and in both arms. X-rays were taken of the head, of the chest to photograph the ribs, of the hip and the arms and they showed no fracture. They showed that the workman had a severe distortion of the spinal column which was not produced by the accident and which constituted a congenital deformity. The workman was given a treatment of aspirin and ice packs and he was not relatively so ill nor was he at any time in a serious condition. Upon admission, he mostly complained of pain in his chest and head, as well as in his arms and hip. His blood pressure was 100/60. No urine or blood tests were made because they are not done unless required. They found only the kyphosis deformity or distortion, and Dr. Meléndez referred to the text of the following annotation by the X-ray technician: “This patient has deformed body and it prevents him from cooperating in taking X-rays plates.” She explained that the cervicals instead of being straight, formed-I a 90° arch to the left and another angle to the right forming a kyphosis. Respecting his liver Dr. Meléndez stated that he did not notice any abnormality. He did not see this workman again after he left the clinic.

S A witness named Pedro Angel López testified that he ¡used to take the workman daily to his work and also brought [58] him back home in his car until the day of the accident. Then he saw that he could not work, he had bulging eyes, and he would become insane, explaining that he saw him often running after his children and that one night he threw them out of the house.

The widow stated that she had been married to the workman for 22 years; that she considered him a healthy man because he did not miss a day of work; that after the accident his health began to fail considerably because he could not work; that on the day of his death she took him to the District Hospital because he had a severe pain, whereupon he was given an appointment for the 21st or 22d of that month, and she brought him back home where he died about two hours later. Explaining the condition of the workman after the fall she stated that before the accident he was a person who had always dislike loud talking “and after the accident he came in breaking and throwing out the window and throwing us out the house.” At such times she was compelled to go out into the streets with her children. He would put his hands “like this” and suddenly he would ask what was the matter with him, and why had he thrown them out. The man was sick and he was depressed because he could not work. He would tell his children that he regretted to see them go hungry while he was unable to work. His eyes grew black and he did not have them that way before and became red inside an bulged out. Since that fall he “was through forever.” The widow also testified that the workman went to the doctor every six months to have X-rays taken and he was never told that he was suffering from a heart condition. He was not often absent from work.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cabrera v. Industrial Commission, 85 P.R. 54 (prsupreme 1962).

85 P.R. 54 (Cabrera v. Industrial Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.