Opinion
39485.
DECIDED JUNE 18, 1962.
Workmen's compensation. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge McKenzie.
Grace W. Thomas, for plaintiff in error.
Benj. B. Blackburn, III, Woodruff, Latimer Savell, Lane Williams, John M. Williams, contra.
The superior court did not err in affirming the award of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation denying the claim for compensation.
DECIDED JUNE 18, 1962.
John H. Butler filed a claim before the State Board of Workmen's Compensation for "all benefits accruing to him by reason of an occupational injury sustained by him during his employment at National Lead Company, and as a direct result of his employment and the handling of lead and lead products." The claim proceeded to a hearing before a single director and upon ascertaining that it was the claimant's contention that he was permanently disabled as a result of lead poisoning and that his claim was brought under the Occupational Disease Section of the Workmen's Compensation Act (Ga. L. 1946, p. 103; Code Ann. Ch. 114-8), the case was referred by the hearing director to the Medical Board for a determination of the medical questions in controversy in accordance with the mandate of Code Ann. § 114-819. The Medical Board rendered a decision holding that the claimant was not suffering from lead poisoning as a compensable malady under the provisions of Code Ann. § 114-803. On appeal the Medical Board adhered to this decision and the hearing director entered an award denying compensation in accordance with that decision under the provisions of Code Ann. § 114-823 (5), said award being affirmed by the full board on appeal. The Superior Court of Fulton County affirmed the full board's award and the claimant excepted to that judgment.
"Where a claim before the State Board of Workmen's Compensation involves a question of whether the employee is disabled as the result of an occupational disease, the sole jurisdiction to decided this medical issue lies with the Medical Board, and the only jurisdiction of the Board of Workmen's Compensation is to enter an award in conformity therewith. Code Ann. § 114-819; Griffith v. Employers Mutual Liability Ins. Co., 100 Ga. App. 157 ( 110 S.E.2d 539). The findings of the Medical Board are conclusive and not reviewable unless an appeal is made directly therefrom on statutory grounds. Code Ann. § 114-823 (5); Borden Co. v. Fuerlinger, 95 Ga. App. 556 (1) ( 98 S.E.2d 410)." Farrill v. Travelers Ins. Co., 105 Ga. App. 600 ( 125 S.E.2d 562).
The record in this case does not show that the members of the Medical Board acted without and in excess of their powers in making the instant decision or that said decision was contrary to law or that there was not sufficient competent evidence to support said decision, the three statutory grounds of appeal relied upon by the claimant in this case. To the contrary, the record shows that the Medical Board made a very thorough and exhaustive study of this case, heard testimony from eminent medical authorities in this field, and had available to them the results of the usual tests conducted to determine the presence of lead poisoning in a human being. The Medical Board after its second hearing in the matter said, "The board has stated in a previous opinion that they could not establish lead poisoning in Butler from a medical viewpoint; yet, the board would not go so far as to say that Butler may not have a masked case of lead poisoning. Perhaps his condition might have become obscured by treatment, and other influences which we do not know about; yet hematologically and chemically, lead poisoning in Butler cannot be substantiated." The report went on to say, ". . . if a diagnosis of lead poisoning was made in his case, it would have to be made purely on the fact that he had worked in a lead industry where he was exposed and nothing more."
Thus, the medical issue in this case has been decided against the claimant by the only tribunal having jurisdiction to decide the issue. There is ample evidence in the record to support the conclusion reached by the Medical Board.
Accordingly, the Superior Court of Fulton County did not err in affirming the award of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation, denying the claim.
Judgment affirmed, Nichols, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.