Norwich bulletin., 1918-02-07
AWARDED COMPENSATION
 FOR BROKEN ANKLE
Carlos vaIente Was Injured While Working for Construction Company

FOR BROKEN ANKLE Carlos Vaiente Was injured While Working for Construction Company,
 Compensation at s7.50 weekly from April 27, 1917, to January 6. 1918, and S4.50 weekly for partial disability from Jan. '. 1918. until such time as the claimant may be able to earn his for ,n1er wages of $15 weekly has been awarded by Commissioner James J. Donohne in the case of Carlos Valente of School street, Putnam, claimant vs A. Vito Construction Company of Thompson. The hearing was held Jan. 25. The finding which was made pub- lie on Wednesday afternoon says:
 It is found that the average weekly wages of the claimant computed in ac- cerdance with the terms of the act, were $15.00.
 From the testimony it is found that the claimant sustained an injury con- sisting of a broken ankle while in the employ of the respondent company on June 8, 1914. at which time the A. Vito Construction Co. were insured with the Aetna Life Insurance Co. of Hart ford, and an award for cempensa- ton and medical, surgical ana hospital services was made against said re- spondents on Dec. 27. 1915. the claim ant at that time receiving in full all compensation then due him because of said injury.
 It is found that following the above mentioned injGxy the claimant was in a New London hospital on several .oc- casions, covering in all a period of about IS months, but that he recovered eventually and after about two months time he again entered the employ of the same company.
 At the hearing he testified that since that time he had not suffered any pain or inconvenience from said injury ex- cept for. a little lameness and that when he resumed work, for the Vito Construction Company he was able to do whatever wor kwas required of him.
 From the evidence 1t. is found that in April of 1917, the exact date being undetermined, but about the 17th inst, said Carlos Valente was driving a team for the respondent company and the horses started and threw him from ] the wagon and he landed on some broken stones on his left side and an- kle and again injured his ankle in | the same place as before on June Sth, 1914. the injury causing immediate dis ability.
 The claimant testified that follow ing the second injury to his left ankle 1 he was unable to walk on the foot al all, and that he turned his team over to another employe' and with the helr 1 of two sticks he reached his home which was short distance from the 1 place where he was injured in Put l nam, and summoned a physician, and ! MI e IafA hospital where he was attended by pr tOverlock, and where it became neces- sary to operate three different times | It is found that the claimant lett 1 the hospital on Dec. 31, 1917, and re- turned to work on Jan. z. 1918, in g box shop where he obtained 8 position where he could sit down, his wages at present being s6 per week. The date of his entering the hospital >is found to be April 26, 1917. and he was 1 charged for treatment up to Dec. 20 1917, the bill amounting to $4sT. The
 bill of Dr. Overlook is found to be l S250.
 The claim of the injured employe i. found to be. compensation during thc
 disability (totaD following his injur, of April IT. 1917. and partial disability from Jan. [. 1918; also for tj.e medical I Soi oANol dilu HOSpItdt DlllS TOuQ6T0C
 because of said injury and subsequen
 disability. 1 The hearing was called to deternfn, with whom the liability for the secont
 injury rested, the Travellers Insurance company at first claiming that thu
 long disability following the secont injury was really caused by thet for
 fner injury. The Aetna Life Insurance
 company who carried the liability a
 the time of the first injury in 1914 claimed they were not responsible fo the disability and bills resulting iron the second injury on the ground tha they had fully compensated the claim
 ant for the injury received in Jun,
 1914, and that when he re-entered tn,
 employ of the respondent company h. had fully recovered from said injury
 and that the employer had accepted him as he was with any Weaknesse,
 which he might have, and that tn
 second insurer assumed full habilit.
 from that time on. The Aetna Lif
 Insurance Company also claimed tha
 the second injury was the sole proxi
 mate cause of the latter disability.
 Very interesting briefs were preparet
 oy the. attorneys for the claimant an,
 the Aetna Life Insurance O. Tn
 Travellers Insurance Co.,, by a lette
 from one of their attorneys who wa
 rot able to be present at the hearinI on account of another hearing in an other district on that date. withdrew their defenses and stated that tn
 hearing was called under a misappre
 fension of the facts and that the.
 would assume the liability in tke case l In view of said communication iron
 the Travellers Insurance Company tn claim against the Aetna Life Insuranc
 Company of Hartford. is hereby dis 1 missed.
 Whereupon, it is hereby awarded that the Travellers Insurance compan, shall forthwith pay to the clainan
 through his attorney compensation
 from April 27. 1917, to Jan 6, 191s <. inclusive, at the rate of $7.50 per week and that they shall assume the medi U cal surgical and l,orn:tn1 Iaills irna.,,