The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1917-03-15
PHYSICIANS FEE
 TOO LARGE, CUT IS ORDERED MADE
Manufacturers Interested in Compensation Court Rul-
 ing Issued Today.

The wide scope of the Connecticut workmen's compensation act is seen today in a finding of Commissioner Edward T. Buckingham for this dis triet who has begun the regulation of physicians fees under protest of man. uacturers that they are oftentimes be- ing preyed upon by interruptions med. ical men.
 In the hearing of Helen Kulhey, an empIoye of he Crown Corset Co.,, who asked for compensation for injury through her mother, Mrs. Elizabeth Kulhay. A history of the case pre-. scented to the court was that lon Aug "A, about 11:50 a. m., she stopped work and was hurrying to get a pass to allow her to leave the factory be- fore 12 so that she might eat lunch with girl friend in the park. AS she was running, a pair of scissors. sua- pended by a cord from her wais., hit against box and penetrated the calf oE her leg. part of the scissors breaking off and remaining in her leg.
 There are two questions involved in this case whether the injury was caus- ed !bv the wilfuf and serious misconduct on the part of the claimant, and if not whether the medical and hospital charges were reasonable for a person of the standard of living of the claim. ant In considering the first question due weight must be given to the fact that the claimant was a Polish girl only IS years of age, poorly educated. who could only with great difficulty either understand or speak the Eng fish language, and in wearing the scis- sors around her waist, she was doing what she thought was alright, because she had seen the other girls do it. No evidence was presented to show -haA she had been told not to wear the sc:sssrs in this way, or that it was against the rules to do so. While the conduct of the claimant might be con- sidered careless or thoughtless. in my opinion, it could not be considered ser. ious or wilful misconduct on her part and the. injury was incident to her employment, occurring as it did on the premises of the employer and during her working hours"
 Tn relation to physicians and hos pital charges the testimony of the company physician was to the effect that he talked with the superintend- ent of the company about the case, and the superintendent directed him to take her to the hospital and treat the case; that he operated on her. removing the portion of the scissors from her leg, and by his direction she was put in a private room.
 A hospital bill for $27 and a physi- cian's bill for $43 was presented. In the opinion of the commissioner, the medical bill for treatment of said claimant was in excess of what should have been charged\ for the treatment of a person of like stand ard of living when such treatment is paid for by the injured per- sons. The physician testified that the claimants condition was not one that called for a private ward. and treated by the hospital physician, and would probably have been able to resume work in just as short period. Therefore. in my opinion, the amounts claimed for treatment at the hospital, outside of the operation, should not be allowed. and the bill for medical services out side of the hospital, should amount to $29.
 U It is ordered that the respondent pay the claimant the sum of $5 weekly, the minimum compensation, comencing on the 1lth day after said injury, and continuing during disa- bility; that the respondent pay the Bridgeport hospital the sum of $27 for hospital services; also that re- spondent pay $29 for medical .ser-