Mullen v. City of Hastings

249 N.W. 560, 125 Neb. 172, 1933 Neb. LEXIS 179
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 7, 1933
DocketNo. 28703
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 249 N.W. 560 (Mullen v. City of Hastings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mullen v. City of Hastings, 249 N.W. 560, 125 Neb. 172, 1933 Neb. LEXIS 179 (Neb. 1933).

Opinion

Eberly, J.

This, is a proceeding instituted by Harriet Louise Mullen, widow of Harley Mullen, deceased, under the workmen’s compensation law. Comp. St. 1929, secs. 48-101 et seq. Upon trial in the district court for Adams county, judgment was entered for the plaintiff. Defendant city appeals.

The deceased, approximately 49 years of age, was employed as a member of the fire department of the defend[173]*173ant, city of Hastings, and was on duty as such at the time of his death. About 10 o’clock p. m. on June 17, 1931, this fire department had been summoned to Ingleside, Nebraska, by the discovery of a fire in some farm buildings of the state hospital situated at that place. The deceased, as a member of this department, as operator and mechanic in charge of what is referred to in the evidence as the “fire truck and pumper,” in pursuance of the duties of his employment, proceeded to the scene of this fire. On arrival of this apparatus it was ultimately placed within 20 feet of a lagoon and approximately four blocks east of the burning building. A suction pump, being a part of the equipment of the “fire truck and pumper,” was placed in the waters of the lagoon, and two lines of hose connected with the “pumper” were laid toward the burning buildings, and from this source the transmitting of water to the fire was commenced. Shortly after this pumping-started, one of these lines of hose burst at a point approximately 1,100 feet west of the “fire truck and pumper.” Immediately after this occurrence Harley Mullen, who had just previously been engaged in operating the “pumper,” was found lying on the ground, in close proximity to this machine, dying, if not dead. One witness testified that he saw Harley Mullen as this operator was falling from the pumper. But it was nighttime and the vicinity of this machine was not well illumined at this moment. Neither this witness, nor in fact any other person, is able to tell us what happened at the pumper, if anything, to cause this fall. Immediate investigation of this machine thereafter disclosed no signs of an accident. It remained in good condition except that it had “choked down.”

Within three hours after the death of Harley Mullen an autopsy was performed on his body. The results of this constitute practically the entire basis of the conflicting-claims of the plaintiff and defendant in this litigation.

So far as objective symptoms or evidence disclosed by this examination of this body are concerned, they may, [174]*174for the purposes of this case, be limited to the following:

“There are superficial contusions on the left temporal region and on the left malar bone, extending down over the left cheek. There is also a contusion on the lateral left palpebral cleft, and a slight contusion over the right eyebrow. Palpation of the skull reveals nothing remarkable. The bones feel smooth and solid.- * * * Examination of the nose is negative excepting perhaps a few abrasions on the nasal tip. * * * Palpation of the heart reveals an apex that deviates to the left to the midclavicular line. The left ventricle of this heart is firm, not flabby; and death took place with this heart in systole. The right auricle is slightly dilated and contains1 blood, but the dilatation does not extend past the right sternal border. * * * Opening of the pericardial cavity shows a pericardial sac of normal thickness. The pericardial wall inside is smooth and contains a few centimeters of fluid, but this is of normal quantity. The epicardium is covered with a good layer of fat, the fat increasing as it goes toward the auricles. The heart is of normal size, is not roughened to the palpating finger, and inspection reveals nothing remarkable. * * * An incision was made through the scalp transversely over the vertex. The anterior flap of the scalp was peeled forward and loosened to the supraorbital ridges. The contusion over the frontal bone shows slightly on the epicranium manifested as small hemorrhagic areas. No fracture is palpable or visible. The posterior flap of the scalp was peeled backward to the external occipital protuberance. No contusions or fractures are palpable or visible. The cranial osseous cap was removed with a saw. The cerebrum was inspected and no abnormal changes were visible. The blood vessels and color were normal. No areas of hemorrhage were seen. The brain was lifted and the anterior and middle fossae were palpated and inspected. These were free from blood or bloody extravasations. No fracture or pathology was seen. The tentorium was split lateralward, releasing the [175]*175cerebellum. No fracture or any abnormality was found in the posterior fossa. Numerous sections • were made through the hemispheres and their nuclei, but no hemorrhagic areas or pathology was visible. * * * Sections of the cerebellum show nothing remarkable. * * * The pathological diagnosis is as follows: Healed pulmonary tuberculosis. Chronic pericholecystitis. Heart in strong systole. The immediate cause of this man’s death was perhaps some physical or even emotional stimulation that produced the post-mortem systole of the heart.”

The physician performing the post mortem, called as a witness by plaintiff, testified in part as follows:

“By contusion we mean either a slight hemorrhage or a bluishness of tissue, which may be involving the second layer of skin.” Further, that while personally he had never seen it, medical authorities record cases where contusions in the region where found on this body have caused death without causing lesions in the brain, or leaving any trace in the brain itself, and without a fracture of the skull. In these cases the contusion might not be greater than presented here.

The examination of this witness also included the following :

“Q. Now you examined the heart, and your findings show that it was in systole. Will you tell the court what that means? A. It means that the heart is in contraction. * * * Q. And that was the only unusual feature you found about the heart, was it? A. The only unusual feature about the heart; yes. Q. What was your conclusion then as to the cause of this man’s death, Doctor? A. Well, I did not arrive at any particular conclusion as to this man’s immediate death, as far as I could determine by the autopsy. * * * Q. You have had cases, have you not, Doctor, in an autopsy where one was conducted, where the cause of death could not be determined? A. It couldn’t be determined; yes. Q. And the same might be true of Mr. Mullen here? A. That is possible. Q. Well, [176]*176as far as you could determine anything, you put it into your report at the time that you made it? A. Yes, sir. Q. Your report stated your conclusions on that? A. Yes.”

The assistant in performing this post mortem, a licensed physician of seventeen years’ experience, also testified with reference to the “bruises,” and stated that in performing the autopsy he noted a contusion on the left side of Mullen's head, which was probably an inch and a half or two inches across; that it was a reddened area on the left side slightly over the eye and down on the cheek; that it was evidently caused by a fall; that he would say that these bruises in the region where found on Mullen’s head could not be sufficient to produce death without leaving lesions on the brain or affecting the skull.

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

Related

Niesen v. LOGAN COUNTY CO-OP OIL ASS'N
340 N.W.2d 146 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1983)
Marasco v. Fitzpatrick
113 N.W.2d 112 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1962)
Botts-Hulme & Odell v. Tate
265 P.2d 709 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1953)
Pixa v. Grainger Bros.
12 N.W.2d 74 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1943)
Duncan v. Weidman
11 N.W.2d 537 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1943)
Mook v. City of Lincoln
9 N.W.2d 184 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1943)
Ottens v. Western Contracting Co.
296 N.W. 431 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1941)
Bell v. Denton
284 N.W. 751 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1939)
O'Connor v. Abbott
279 N.W. 207 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1938)
Shamp v. Landy Clark Co.
277 N.W. 802 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1938)
Skochdopole v. State, Department of Roads & Irrigation
275 N.W. 665 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1937)
Porter v. Brinn-Jensen Co.
269 N.W. 96 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1936)
Mulvey v. City of Lincoln
267 N.W. 459 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1936)
Hudson v. City of Lincoln
258 N.W. 398 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1935)
Truka v. McDonald
257 N.W. 232 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1934)
Brady v. Beatrice Creamery Co.
257 N.W. 66 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1934)
Kirkpatrick v. Chocolate Sales Corp.
256 N.W. 89 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1934)
Beatrice Creamery Co. v. Kizer
254 N.W. 690 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
249 N.W. 560, 125 Neb. 172, 1933 Neb. LEXIS 179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mullen-v-city-of-hastings-neb-1933.