Case Name: GIRDLEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY and Associated Industries of Florida, Appellants, v. Bert OHMSTEDE (deceased) and Mrs. Bert Ohmstede, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1985-03-19
Citations: 465 So. 2d 594
Docket Number: No. AX-7
Parties: GIRDLEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY and Associated Industries of Florida, Appellants, v. Bert OHMSTEDE (deceased) and Mrs. Bert Ohmstede, Appellees.
Judges: SMITH, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 465
Pages: 594–598

Head Matter:
GIRDLEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY and Associated Industries of Florida, Appellants, v. Bert OHMSTEDE (deceased) and Mrs. Bert Ohmstede, Appellees.
No. AX-7.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
March 19, 1985.
F. Bradley Hassell of Smalbein, Eubank, Johnson, Rosier & Bussey, Daytona Beach, for appellants.
Mark A. Olewinski, Lake Mary, for ap-pellees.

Opinion:
AS CORRECTED ON DENIAL OF REHEARING
THOMPSON, Judge.
The employer and carrier appeal an order finding that the employee's death was a result of an accident which arose out of and in the course of his employment and awarding his widow death benefits. We reverse.
The decedent, a construction foreman, sustained a compensable injury when he struck his head on a two-by-four. One fellow employee testified that immediately after the accident the decedent did not complain of injury and continued working. Another fellow employee testified that following the accident the decedent had an abrasion on his left forehead above the eye and an abrasion on his left cheek. The decedent's widow testified that when her husband returned home on the evening of the day of the accident, he appeared distraught and tired, and had tears in his eyes. She said he had an abrasion on the right side of his forehead that looked like a severe wood burn. He had little appetite, was listless and seemed to have problems with his balance, memory and coordination, and these problems seemed to worsen over the weekend. She last saw her husband on the night of February 20. On the afternoon of February 21, a witness traveling south on Interstate 95 saw the decedent step over a guardrail, and without looking, walk into the path of an oncoming truck. The impact resulted in his death a few minutes later.
Although there was evidence of unusual or peculiar actions by the decedent subsequent to his industrial accident, there was also evidence of unusual or peculiar actions by the decedent prior to the accident. One fellow employee testified that during the two months before the accident he observed the decedent crying and twisting his hands and that the decedent would give no explanation for his strange actions. Dr. Botting testified that the deceased had a history of bizarre behavior. There was also testimony that the decedent had domestic problems that resulted in emotional stress prior to the accident.
The medical examiner who performed the autopsy testified that there were several possibilities that could have combined to cause the fatal accident. The possibilities were that the decedent's subdural hemato-ma-could have been caused by the accident, that the subdural hematoma could have resulted in confusion and some sort of neurological impairment, and that the mental impairment could have caused decedent to walk in front of the truck. He stated that the degree of hemorrhage was not very great but could not say that there was more than a mere medical possibility that the blows to the head of the decedent caused his subdural hematoma. Neither could he say within a reasonable medical probability that the blow to decedent's head on Friday had caused him to walk into the path of the truck three days later.
Circumstantial evidence may be relied on in a civil case to prove an essential fact, but the particular inference of the existence of the fact relied upon must outweigh all contrary inferences that might be drawn from the same circumstances. Furthermore, an inference upon an inference may not be relied on to establish an essential fact unless the original inference can be elevated to the dignity of an established fact because of the absence of any reasonable inference to the contrary. Voelker v. Combined Insurance Company of America, 73 So.2d 403 (Fla.1954); Commercial Credit Corporation v. Varn, 108 So.2d 638 (Fla.1959). In reaching his conclusion that the decedent sustained an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, the deputy relied initially upon an inference that the accident caused the subdural he-matoma, upon a further inference that the subdural hematoma led to some physical and mental impairment, and upon the still further inference that the physical and mental impairment caused the decedent to walk in front of the truck some three days later. This was an impermissible stacking of inference upon inference.
REVERSED.
SMITH, J., concurs.
BOOTH, J., dissents.