Sullivan v. Social Circle Cotton Mills

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sullivan v. Social Circle Cotton Mills

154 S.E. 467, 41 Ga. App. 714, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 1068

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 28, 1930

Docket20237

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 154 S.E. 467 (Sullivan v. Social Circle Cotton Mills) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sullivan v. Social Circle Cotton Mills, 154 S.E. 467, 41 Ga. App. 714, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 1068 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

1. The findings of fact by the industrial commission, when supported by the evidence, are binding upon the courts. Maryland Casualty Co. v. England, 160 Ga. 810 (129 S. E. 75).

2. “In all claims for compensation for hernia resulting from injury by accident arising out of and in the course of the employee’s employment, it must be definitely proved to the satisfaction of the industrial commission: first, that there was an injury resulting in hernia; second, that the hernia appeared suddenly; third, that it was accompanied by pain; fourth, that the hernia immediately followed an accident; fifth, that the hernia did not exist prior to the accident for which compensation is claimed.” Workmen’s compensation act, § 2(e), Acts 1920, pp. 167, 170; 9 Park’s Code Supp. 1922, § 3154(e). Accordingly, since the evidence in the instant case authorized the finding of the industrial commission that the only disability suffered by the claimant by reason of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment consisted in pain and suffering from a hernia which existed prior to the accident, the award of the commission denying compensation was authorized and can not be set aside. Especially would such a rule apply where, as here, the medical testimony authorized the conclusion that the fall sustained by the claimant merely knocked off his truss, and [715]*715caused a temporary protrusion of the intestines through the existing hernia, and that there was no enlargement or aggravation of the preexisting. hernia condition.

Decided August 28, 1930. William H. Smith, for plaintiff. Harry L. Greene, McDaniel, Neely & Marshall, for defendant.

3. The judge of the superior court did not err in affirming the award of the industrial commission denying compensation.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

1. The findings of fact by the industrial commission, when supported by the evidence, are binding upon the courts. Maryland Casualty Co. v. England, 160 Ga. 810 (129 S. E. 75).

2. “In all claims for compensation for hernia resulting from injury by accident arising out of and in the course of the employee’s employment, it must be definitely proved to the satisfaction of the industrial commission: first, that there was an injury resulting in hernia; second, that the hernia appeared suddenly; third, that it was accompanied by pain; fourth, that the hernia immediately followed an accident; fifth, that the hernia did not exist prior to the accident for which compensation is claimed.” Workmen’s compensation act, § 2(e), Acts 1920, pp. 167, 170; 9 Park’s Code Supp. 1922, § 3154(e). Accordingly, since the evidence in the instant case authorized the finding of the industrial commission that the only disability suffered by the claimant by reason of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment consisted in pain and suffering from a hernia which existed prior to the accident, the award of the commission denying compensation was authorized and can not be set aside. Especially would such a rule apply where, as here, the medical testimony authorized the conclusion that the fall sustained by the claimant merely knocked off his truss, and [715]*715caused a temporary protrusion of the intestines through the existing hernia, and that there was no enlargement or aggravation of the preexisting. hernia condition.

Decided August 28, 1930. William H. Smith, for plaintiff. Harry L. Greene, McDaniel, Neely & Marshall, for defendant.

3. The judge of the superior court did not err in affirming the award of the industrial commission denying compensation.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 S.E. 467, 41 Ga. App. 714, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 1068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-social-circle-cotton-mills-gactapp-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack