Opinion
Civil No. 4305.
Filed July 16, 1941.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION. — Where medical experts disagreed as to whether claimant's admitted disability was proximately the result of an injury by accident arising out of and in course of his employment, the Supreme Court could not set aside an award of the Industrial Commission denying compensation.
See 27 Cal. Jur. 579; 28 R.C.L. 829 (8 Perm. Supp., p. 6255).
APPEAL by Certiorari from an award of The Industrial Commission of Arizona. Award affirmed.
Mr. Burt H. Clingan, for Petitioner.
Mr. Rouland W. Hill and Mr. Howard A. Twitty, for Respondents.
O.P. Lauderdale, petitioner, has brought before us by the usual certiorari the award of the Industrial Commission of Arizona, called the commission, denying him compensation for alleged injuries received as the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.
Petitioner, in his brief, states frankly that the only issue before us is whether the commission acted without and in excess of its jurisdiction in finding that the evidence was insufficient to establish that his admitted disability was proximately the result of an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.
Petitioner has been examined at various times since his accident by eighteen different physicians. Of these, five testified that in their opinion his condition was probably the result of the accident which it is admitted he suffered, eleven stated that in their opinion it was not, while two were noncommittal.
The question was one which must be determined on expert medical testimony. Following our long and unbroken line of decisions, we cannot set aside an award of the commission based on conflicting evidence of this nature.
The award is affirmed.
McALISTER and ROSS, JJ., concur.