Case Name: WALTER PENN DAVIS, Employee, v. CITY OF WINSTON-SALEM, Self-Insurer, EmployeR
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1951-07-17
Citations: 234 N.C. 95
Docket Number: 
Parties: WALTER PENN DAVIS, Employee, v. CITY OF WINSTON-SALEM, Self-Insurer, EmployeR.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 234
Pages: 95–95

Head Matter:
WALTER PENN DAVIS, Employee, v. CITY OF WINSTON-SALEM, Self-Insurer, EmployeR.
(Filed 17 July, 1951.)
Appeal by defendant from Crisp, Special Judge, at April Term, 1951, of Forsyth.
Proceeding under Workmen’s Compensation Act to determine claim of Walter Penn Davis for disability due to heart disease (angina pectoris resulting from coronary arteriosclerosis) alleged to have developed as an occupational disease while he was serving as a member of the Fire Department of the City of Winston-Salem, self-insurer.
The Industrial Commission awarded compensation. This was affirmed on appeal to the Superior Court. From the latter ruling, the defendant appeals, assigning errors.
W. Scott Bucle and J. C. B. Ehringhaus, Jr., for plaintiff, appellee.
Grover H. J ones and Womble, Carlyle, Martin Sandridge for defendant, appellant.

Opinion:
JohNsoN, J.
The award and judgment below rest solely on the 1949 amendment to the Workmen's Compensation Act, Chapter 1078, Session Laws of 1949, now codified as G.S. 97-53 (26), which provides that certain classified heart diseases, including angina pectoris, shall be deemed and treated as compensable occupational diseases as to active members of fire departments of cities, towns, and other political subdivisions of the State.
The award below is unsupported by evidence showing causal relation between the claimant's heart disease and the employment out of which it supposedly arose. And the 1949 amendment under which the award was made having been declared repugnant to Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution of North Carolina, by decision filed simultaneously herewith in Duncan v. City of Charlotte, ante, 86, which is precisely decisive of the question raised by the instant appeal, the judgment below is
Reversed.