Case Name: Newkirk v. Golden Cycle Mining & Reduction Co., et al.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Colorado
Decision Date: 1926-04-05
Citations: 79 Colo. 298
Docket Number: No. 11,517
Parties: Newkirk v. Golden Cycle Mining & Reduction Co., et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Colorado Reports
Volume: 79
Pages: 298–299

Head Matter:
No. 11,517.
Newkirk v. Golden Cycle Mining & Reduction Co., et al.
Decided April 5, 1926.
Mr. James A. Orr, Mr. H. T. McGarry, for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. Sherwin & Hungereord, Mr. O. H. Smith, Mr. William L. Boatright, Attorney General, Mr. Otto Friedrichs, Assistant, for defendants in error.
Department Two.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Denison
delivered the opinion of the court.
The industrial commission denied compensation to Mary A. Newkirk for the death of her husband, the district court affirmed the order and she brings the case here. The judgment was right.
The accident was taking cold by exposure while fighting a fire on the employer's premises. Pneumonia appeared seven or eight days later, of which the victim died in six days.
The commission found that there was no connection between the cold and the pneumonia. There was evidence of competent physicians, among whom was the attending physician, to that effect; we, therefore, as well as the district court, must take the finding as true. Bohmann v. Industrial Commission, 76 Colo. 588, 233 Pac. 621; Passini v. Industrial Commission, 64 Colo. 349, 171 Pac. 369.
It is urged that the cold made the employe more susceptible to the pneumonia germ, but that is not a sufficient connection with the accident to justify compensation (Prouse v. Industrial Commission, 69 Colo. 382, 194 Pac. 625), because the accident must be the proximate cause of the death or of the disease which causes the death. (Id.) The denial was therefore right.
The commission also found that the cold was not an accident. If the employe had died of the cold we should have had here a serious question, but on this record it is not before us.
It is claimed that the findings of the commission are insufficient. They might well be more detailed, but on the controlling facts they are definite and clear.
Judgment affirmed.
Mr. Chiee Justice Allen and Mr. Justice Whiteord concur.