Court Opinion

ID: 9573873
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:00:00.99882+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:28.711016
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice McWilliams
dissents:
Claimant has the burden to prove and establish that the death of her husband on February 9, 1956, from bacterial pneumonia was caused by the accidental chest injuries sustained on January 16 and 27, 1956. In his report the attending physician described this as a “questionable case considering the time which elapsed from the date of the injury and his date of death” and he, at least, declined to express the medical opinion that there was a “causal connection” between the accidental injury and the ensuing death, with the parting comment that he “would respect the opinion of a chest specialist over and above my own, in this regard.”
Claimant did not call a chest specialist, and the only other medical testimony came from the doctor who two days after death performed the autopsy. This doctor was a general surgeon, and not a pathologist, and his testimony is fully set forth in the majority opinion. This doctor quite candidly observed that there was a “confusing factor” in the instant case. The Commission was not bound to accept his expression of opinion as necessarily being medically correct. In my opinion his testimony when viewed as a whole leaves room for real doubt as to whether there was any connection between the chest injury and resulting death from bacterial pneumonia.
On this state of the record the Industrial Commission found, in part, as follows: “* * * that the evidence relating to the cause of the decedent’s death does not estab*566lish that his death was proximately caused by the accidental injuries of January 16 and 27, 1956 * * * The medical evidence appearing in this matter is consistently to the effect that decedent died from pneumonia * * * Here, claimants have failed to show by such evidence that the injuries sustained by decedent resulted in his death * * * To find otherwise would be to base an award on speculation and conjecture * *
Based upon the record before it, the Industrial Commission was fully justified in making this finding and upon judicial review it should not be disturbed.
Mr. Justice Day joins in this dissent.