No. 88-301 

LN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

1989 

LINDA J. WINCHELL , (Richard M. Winchell, fatal), 

Claimant ad Respondent, 

-vsFALTJS SHEET METAL, 

Employer, 

and 

STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

APPEAL FROM: The Workers' Compensation Court, The Honorable 

Timothv Reardon, Zudge presiding. 

COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

For Appellant: 

Charles R. Johnson; Marra, Wenz, Johnson & Hopkins, 

Great Falls, Montana 

For Respondent: 

J. David Slovak; Ugrin, Alexander, Zadick & Slovak, 

Great Falls, Montana 

CSubmitted on Briefs: Nov. 17, 1988 

Decided: January 5, 1989 

Fired: 2 <A 

-J !I " -- C 3 G e3 C; - ED SMITH LI 

- Clerk 
Mr. Justice Fred J. Weber delivered the Opinion of the Court. 

Linda Winchell filed a claim for compensation following 

the death of her husband, Richard Winchell. The Workers' 

Compensation Court determined that Richard's death due to a 

ruptured congenital aneurysm was the result of a compensable 

injury within the meaning of the Workers' Compensation Act of 

1985. The State Insurance Fund (State Fund) appeals from 

that determination. We affirm. 

We consolidate the issues set forth by the State Fund 

into a single inquiry for purposes of our review: 

Did the Workers' Compensation Court err in determininq 

that Richard Winchell's death was the result of a compensahle 

injury? 

On December 6, 1985, Richard Winchell suffered a ruptured congenital brain aneurysm while performing his duties 

at Falls Sheet Metal, a family owned business in Great Falls, 

Montana. Richard was the president of Falls Sheet Metal, 

which was engaged in the sale, installation, and repair of 

heating and air-conditioning systems. He had been involved 

in the business for 31 years and his primary responsibilities 

were to perform warranty and service work on systems which 

Falls Sheet Metal installed. 

The morning of December 6, 1985, Richard was preparing 

to convert a natural gas furnace to propane when he collapsed 

to the floor of the shop soon after arriving at work. He was 

discovered by his brother, Gary Winchell, and was transported 

to a local hospital where he died 5 days later without regaining consciousness. He was 44 years old and was survived 

by his wife Linda and their two minor children. 

The cause of Richard's death is undisputed. He died of 

a "subarachnoid hemorrhage resulting from a ruptured 
congenital saccular aneurysm of the intracranial arteries at 

the base of the brain." Through deposition testimony, a 

neurosurgeon described an aneurysm as "an out-pouching or 

bulging in the wall of a blood vessel due to a weakness in 

the wall. This outpouching is a thin inelastic wall, which 

may either turn to fibrous tissue, or it may become thinner 

and thinner and then eventually burst." The neurosurgeon 

testified that while Richard's aneurysm was not present from 

birth, as might be implied from the term "congenital," the 

predisposition or weakness was, and the aneurysm developed 

over the ensuing years. 

All four of the medical experts deposed, including the 

neurosurgeon, agreed that hypertension is a major contributing factor to the growth of an aneurysm. One of the medical 

experts stressed the importance of treating high blood pressure in persons with a predisposition for an aneurysm, in 

order to deter the aggravation of a preexisting aneurysm. 

There was no evidence that Richard Winchell or his doctors 

were aware of any high blood pressure in the decedent prior 

to his death. A physician who examined Richard on two occa-- 

sions during the year preceding his death testified that his 

blood pressure was normal on both dates. However, the autopsy revealed that Richard had suffered hypertension for several months prior to his death. The pathologist who performed 

the autopsy testified that the left ventricle of Richard's 

heart was enlarged, which is consistent with high blood 

pressure, and that the thickness of the left ventricular wallindicated hypertension had been present for at least months. 

The medical experts agreed that hypertension can be 

sustained over a long period of time or it can be a temporary 

increase in blood pressure. The experts varied in their 

opinions about the causes of hypertension or what degree of 

hypertension would cause an aneurysm to rupture. Three of 
the experts testified that mental stress or perceived mental 

stress could sufficiently raise a person's blood pressure. 

The fourth physician stated that mental stress was not known 

to play an active role in the rupture of an aneurysm, but he 

testified that mental stress can cause the release of adrenal 

hormones which has been linked to hypertension. 

Vigorous physical activity and extreme emotional reactions were identified as other factors leading to a temporarv 

increase in blood pressure. Finally, there was testimony to 

the effect that, regardless of conjecture, it is impossible 

for medical science to determine what actually caused Richard 

Winchell's aneurysm to rupture. On appeal, the State Fund 

contends that the claimant has failed to show, either through 

medical testimony or by other evidence, that the decedent's 

work had anything to do with his ruptured aneurysm. 

Did the Workers' Compensation Court err in determining 

that Richard Winchell's death was the result of a compensahle 

injury? 

The standard of review to be applied is whether substantial credible evidence was presented to support the Workers' 

Compensation Court's determination that Richard Winchell died 

as a result of a compensable injury. Snyder v. San Francisco 

Feed and Grain (Mont. 1987), 748 P.2d 924, 929, 44 St.Rep. 

2216, 2224. For Linda Winchell to be successful in her 

claim, she was required to prove that her husband's death 

resulted from an injury which arose out of and was in the 

course of his employment. Section 39-71-407, MCA (1985). In 

Snyder, this Court found a compensable injury under the 1985 

Workers' Compensation Act where the claimant suffered a 

ruptured aneurysm which was shown to be aggravated to the 

point of rupture by mental strain due to the claimant's 

stressful work environment. Snyder, 748 P. 2d at 930. Under 
that theory it was necessary for Linda Winchell to bring 

forth evidence of a stressful work environment and to establish causation. We note that the legislature has amended the 

definition of "in jury" under the 1987 Workers ' Compensation 

Act to preclude recovery for injuries caused by physical or 

mental conditions which arise from emotional or mental 

stress, which is not applicable here. Section 39-71-119, 

MCA . 

The Workers' Compensation Court correctly noted that 

because medical science is presently unable to determine 

exactly what caused Richard's aneurysm to rupture, it is 

necessary to look to indirect evidence to establish causation. Conway v. Blackfeet Indian Developers, Inc. (1983) , 

205 P4ont. 459, 468, 669 P.2d 225, 229. The court referred to 

the testimony of the four medical experts and Richard's wife 

and brothers to determine whether his rupture could have been 

caused by hypertension due to a stressful work environment. 

We will review the court's findings of fact in this regard to 

see if they are supported by the evidence in the record. 

The Workers' Compensation Court found that the period of 

September through the end of November is generally the most 

hectic time of year at Falls Sheet Pletal. Customers who have 

problems with their heating systems usually wait until the 

cold sets in to have an!7 repairs done. Recently installed 

systems, of which there were many during that period, often 

require warranty service to work out minor problems. It was 

Richard's responsibility to respond to those service and 

warranty calls. According to business records, Falls Sheet 

Metal performed I? service calls during the month of November 

and 20 service calls during December of 1985. There was no 

documentation on how many warranty calls were made during 

that time. The court also found that November and December 

of 1985 were unusually cold months even for Montana, which 
resulted in Richard's service calls often being of an emergency nature and requiring immediate attention. These findings are substantiated by the testimony of Gary Winchell, 

Richards' brother and co-owner of the family business, who 

handled many of the incoming service request calls during 

that period. 

Detailed findings were made by the court regarding 

Richard Winchell's easygoing nature and uncomplaining attitude, which began to change during the weeks prior to his 

death. The court found Richard to be a taciturn man who 

liked to work at his own pace, was not accustomed to doing a 

lot of emergency type work, and would not express himself 

regarding any stresses or emotional or physical problems he 

might be experiencing. Although Gary Winchell testified that 

his brother did not appear any more hurried or busy during 

November, he did notice that Richard looked "kind of peaked." 

The court made similar findings based on the testimony 

of Richard's wife Linda. During the weeks prior to his 

death, Richard appeared to be very fatigued and he complained 

of the terrible cold. He had become "crabbier and he barked 

at the children." He complained of chest pains and intermittent headaches, and told Linda that he was tired because they 

were "running their butts off" at the shop. One Friday night 

approximately 2 weeks prior to his collapse, Richard responded to two night-time service calls. That evening he came 

home from work complaining of fatigue and chills, and went to 

bed early. At 10:30 p.m. he was awakened by a telephone 

service call to which he responded and returned home an hour 

later. At 2:30 a.m. Richard was required to respond to 

another service call. He returned very tired and chilled, as 

it was 30 degrees below zero that night. Four days prior to 

his collapse, the court found that Richard suffered a debilitating headache which he described as feeling "like he had a 
tumor in his head," and which caused him difficulty in sleeping for several days. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the court ' s explicit findings regarding Richard' s 

characteristic temperament and his apparent change in demeanor closely parallel the testimony of the brother and the 

wife, and that this is substantial evidence to support the 

court's findings. 

Based on those findings, the court concluded that Richard's sudden change in demeanor was inconsistent with his 

easygoing nature, illustrating that he was undergoing a 

period of unusual stress. Given his tendency to keep his 

feelings and emotions to himself, we do not consider it 

unusual that Richard did not relate any stresses he might 

have felt to his family, much less discuss the source or 

implications of that stress. 

The medical experts agreed that hypertension is a major 

contributory factor to the rupture of an aneurysm, and the 

pathologist's findings conclusively establish that Richard 

suffered hypertension for at least several months prior to 

his death. We note that there was no evidence indicating 

that any other facet of Richard's life outside of his work 

produced any stress or emotional strain. We conclude that 

the medical evidence together with the other evidence is 

sufficient to support the court's conclusion that Richard's 

death was the result of a compensable injury within the 

meaning of the Workers' Compensation Act of 1985. 

Affirmed.