From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Machold v. Bendix Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 19, 1967
28 A.D.2d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Opinion

June 19, 1967


Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision of the Workmen's Compensation Board which affirmed an award of death benefits. Although appellants do not dispute that the decedent died while in the course of his employment, it is their contention that he did not sustain an accidental injury. In preparation for a business trip, decedent who had arranged to pick up an associate, discovered he had a flat tire and had his wife telephone the associate he would be delayed. Some 25 minutes later, he was found unconscious on the ground near the flat tire and next to him there was a removed hub cap and a bumper jack which had been stored underneath the spare tire inside the car. He never regained consiciousness. The cause of death was diagnosed as an intracranial hemorrhage. The three medical witnesses for the claimant and the medical witness called by appellants agreed that death was precipitated by the massive hemorrhage resulting from a rupture of a cerebral artery. While we have held ( Matter of Herring v. Second Presbyterian Church, 26 A.D.2d 874) that "the Masse requirement [unusual and strenuous exertion] is not applicable in cases such as the instant one where there is an actual rupture of an artery or other portion of the internal anatomy", and thus obviating further proof, there is ample evidence in this record to the effect that there was a causal relationship between the fatal rupture and the events of that morning involving a combination of emotional anxiety and physical stress. We would further observe that from the physical evidence, the board was entitled to draw reasonable inferences from the facts and circumstances ( Matter of Giuffre v. Fago Bros. Contr. Co., 20 A.D.2d 605). There is substantial evidence in the record to sustain the board's findings of an industrial accident causally related to his employment, which we must sustain. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen's Compensation Board. Gibson, P.J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Gabrielli, J.


Summaries of

Matter of Machold v. Bendix Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 19, 1967
28 A.D.2d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)
Case details for

Matter of Machold v. Bendix Corporation

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of RUTH MACHOLD, Respondent, v. BENDIX…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jun 19, 1967

Citations

28 A.D.2d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Citing Cases

Matter of Neblett v. Salvation Army

We hold that the board's decision should be sustained. As noted above, the opposing parties concede that…

Matter of Machold v. Bendix Corp.

Decided September 21, 1967 Appeal from (3d dept.: 28 A.D.2d 753) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO…