Court Opinion

ID: 9585860
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:04:32.465038+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:15.845527
License: Public Domain

J. Woodrow Lewis, Acting Associate Justice
(dissenting) .
I think that under the testimony in this case and the permitted inferences to be drawn therefrom the question of whether the fall of the deceased arose out of and in the course of his employment were issues to be determined by the commission. There can be no doubt that from the record the inference that the fall of the deceased was caused by a physical seizure is a plausible one. Indulging the presumption of fact from the unexplained fall Owens v. Ocean Forest Club, 196 S. C. 97, 12 S. E. (2d) 839; Buff v. Columbia Baking Co., 215 S. C. 41, 53 S. E. (2d) 879; Holly v. Spartan Grain & Mill Co., 210 S. C. 183, 42 S. E. (2d) 59, that the employee’s death arose out of and in the course of his employment, it cannot be said that the inference drawn by the majority opinion is the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the testimony. The weight to be given the testimony of the witnesses is a matter for the *458-commission to determine and not this court. The commission has weighed the testimony in the light of the permitted inference and has concluded that the deceased suffered a compensable injury.
I would reverse the order of the circuit court and reinstate the award of the Full Commission.