Oliver v. Potlatch Forests, Inc.

245 P.2d 775, 73 Idaho 45, 1952 Ida. LEXIS 207
CourtIdaho Supreme Court
DecidedJune 13, 1952
Docket7860
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 245 P.2d 775 (Oliver v. Potlatch Forests, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Oliver v. Potlatch Forests, Inc., 245 P.2d 775, 73 Idaho 45, 1952 Ida. LEXIS 207 (Idaho 1952).

Opinion

GIVENS, Chief Justice.

March 24, 1949, claimant, employed as choke setter by Potlatch Forests, Inc., fell about 12 to 16 feet as snow on the edge of a road where he was standing thawed and gave way. He landed on his back and shoulders and was knocked out for about ten minutes.

Dr. Pappenhagen examined him at Orofino on the 29th, took X-ray pictures and later taped his back. Dr. Pappenhagen continued to examine him and testified he *47 “could never find any anatomical proof for (claimant’s) disability.” either at the time of the accident in March, 1949, or at the first hearing July 18, 1950, except a strained back received at the time of the accident, i. e., falling, and that claimant was able to return to work June 6, 1949.

Notice of injury and claim for compensation was made by claimant March 25, 1949. Employer’s report showing Workmen’s Compensation Exchange as its insurer was made April 5.

Subsequently, claimant fell and cracked some ribs, contending he would not have so fallen if he had not injured his back March 24. His ribs healed and no significance appears to be attached to this incident, or to an intervening injury to his hand in a fight. He sought further medical examination and treatment and was intermittently examined and March 17, 1950, asked for a hearing by the Board for compensation. He worked infrequently in the interim, claiming he was unable to remain at steady employment because of his back.

July 28, 1950, working for the Caldwell Lumber & Box Company, Idaho Compensation Company, its insurance carrier, on the pond at Horseshoe Bend, claimant, in trying to roll with a peavy a green, 16-ft. yellow pine log 12 inches in diameter out of the chute where it was stuck, got down on his back and could hardly walk.

September 19, 1950, claimant was hospitalized in Saint Lukes, Boise, and Dr. Burton, orthopaedic surgeon, after reviewing his history, taking X-rays, examining him, and taking a myelogram, diagnosed his condition as a ruptured intervertebral disc, performed a laminectomy and removed the ruptured disc and did a fusion. Claimant left the Hospital October 23, 1950.

November 3, 1950, claimant asked for a rehearing on his claim for compensation, in substance asserting the ruptured disc was caused by and continued from the accident of March 24, 1949, aggravated by the accident of July 28, 1950.

The first hearing was held by the Board July 18, 1950, at Orofino.

The second hearing was January 9, 1951, Boise.

Third, January 23, 1951, same place.

Fourth, March 16, 1951, in Spokane, Washington.

Fifth, April 19, 1951, Boise.

In addition to Dr. Pappenhagen, the following admittedly skilled physicians testified as indicated:

Dr. Lander, neurosurgeon, Spokane, from examination and case history December 8, 1949, testified to the same effect as Dr. Pappenhagen. Likewise, Dr. Wetzler, neuropsychiatrist, Spokane, examination April 11, 1950; Dr. Morris, radiologist, Boise, examined X-rays'taken in March and May, 1949, found congenital defect, but no disc injury; Dr. Ward, orthopaedic specialist, Boise, examined claimant and X-rays July 7, 1950, found no evidence of herniated *48 disc; Dr. Shaw, orthopaedic specialist, Boise, examined claimant July 26, 1950, and “did not find claimant had herniated disc.”

None of the above specialists took a myelogram and all testified that disparity of one-fourth inch in size of claimant’s two legs, referred to as atrophy, did not prove a herniated disc existed from time of the March accident.

Dr. Burton gave as bases for his conclusions, severe muscle spasm and rigidity in claimant’s lower back August 1, 1950, extending from the lower dorsal area to the sacral area and that he could not straighten up; atrophy of the right thigh and right calf, indicating pressure on a nerve supplying that leg for a considerable length of time, which would antedate July, 1950; distressing guardedness against any quick movement; limitation of movement in the back in the lumbar area; scoliosis, or deviation from the midline, bowed sidewise, not congenital, but the result of severe muscle spasm; that the myelogram confirmed the presence and location of the ruptured disc, likewise confirmed by X-rays; that at the time of the hearing at which Dr. Burton gave this testimony, January 23, 1951, claimant was surgically healed except for a period of convalescence and 'X-ray examination to determine the solidity of the fusion; that the disc condition could have been dormant or quiescent at times following the first accident and based his opinion that the herniated disc occurred from the injury of March 24, 1949, because of atrophy in claimant’s leg and the history of recurrent pain in his back; that claimant’s ability to work was strictly limited because as soon as he started to work a day or two, or at the most a week, the pain would reoccur and he would have to stop; that the X-rays taken March 29 showed an obliteration of the normal curve due to muscle spasm and list to the spine, and estimated claimant’s permanent partial disability as ten to 15 percent as compared to the loss of one leg at the hip, and that while claimant would be as good as ever after the operation, it took away from his active motion, three joints in the lower part of his back, which had to be taken into account.

The other doctors were examined and cross-examined at great length and disagreed with Dr. Burton as to the emphasis he placed upon the difference in size of the two legs and for various reasons, elaborated at length, were more or less unanimous in the conclusion the ruptured disc was not caused by the first accident, but by the second.

Conceding that at the time of the operation he had a ruptured disc, it is unnecessary to delineate at greater length the highly scientific, skilled, and technical examination of the other physicians, because, conceding their analysis in their opinion, justified their conclusions, the mere fact that six physicians testified there was no connection between the first accident and *49 the ruptured disc found to exist and which was operated on September 19, 1950, following the July accident and only one physician testified there was a causal connection, is not controlling. Madariaga v. Delamar Milling Corp., 64 Idaho 660, at page 664, 135 P.2d 438; Knapp v. Arizona Highway Department, 56 Ariz. 54, 104 P. 2d 180; Stansell v. Tucker, 191 Okl. 377, 130 P.2d 294; Brooks & Dahlgren v. Pettigrew, 195 Okl. 550, 159 P.2d 743; Burk v. American District Telegraph Co., 160 Kan. 519, 163 P.2d 402; Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission, Cal.App., 166 P.2d 908; Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Accident Comm., Cal.Sup., 170 P.2d 18; Black, Sivalls & Bryson, Inc., v. Rhone, 199 Okl. 131, 184. P.2d 769.

Where it requires expert, scientific and professional skill to determine the cause, origin, and extent of a disability, proof thereof must be by skilled, professional witnesses. Zipse v. Schmidt Bros., 66 Idaho, 30,

Related

Drake v. State, Industrial Special Indemnity Fund
920 P.2d 397 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1996)
Drake v. STATE, INDUS. SPEC. INDEM. FUND
920 P.2d 397 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1996)
Bruce v. Clear Springs Trout Farm
707 P.2d 422 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1985)
Hite v. Kulhenak Building Contractor
524 P.2d 531 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1974)
Hammond v. Department of Employment
480 P.2d 912 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1971)
Hathaway v. Utah-Idaho Sugar Co.
468 P.2d 864 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1970)
Earl v. Swift & Company
467 P.2d 589 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1970)
Wilson v. Gardner Associated, Inc.
426 P.2d 567 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1967)
Bradshaw v. Bench Sewer District
414 P.2d 661 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1966)
Bennett v. Bunker Hill Company
399 P.2d 270 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1965)
Stockdale v. Sunshine Mining Co.
373 P.2d 935 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1962)
Clark v. Brennan Construction Company
372 P.2d 761 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1962)
Andrus v. Boise Fruit & Produce Company
371 P.2d 256 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1962)
Lindskog v. Rosebud Mines, Inc.
369 P.2d 580 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1962)
Orr v. State Industrial Accident Commission
342 P.2d 136 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1959)
Laird v. State Highway Department
323 P.2d 1079 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1958)
Larson v. State
320 P.2d 763 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1958)
Smith v. Potlatch Forests, Inc.
264 P.2d 684 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
245 P.2d 775, 73 Idaho 45, 1952 Ida. LEXIS 207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oliver-v-potlatch-forests-inc-idaho-1952.