Opinion · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Watkins v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.
Watkins v. Pittsburgh Coal Co., 278 PA 463 (Pa. 1924)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- Jurisdiction
- Pennsylvania
- Date
- 1924-01-07
- Topic
- employee-benefits-and-executive-compensation
Opinion by Mr. Justice Walling, Plaintiff’s husband, John J. Watkins, was working nights for the Pittsburgh Coal Company, defendant, at a. mine and while his main work was in the boiler house his duty also required him each night to go down into the mine pit and look after the pumps. To do so he *465passed down a flight of twelve steps and thence over a level space, traversed by two railroad tracks, to a stairway leading down some eighty feet to the pumps, where he was usually occupied about an hour and a half. On the evening of March 31,1920, he went to work as usual and about ten o’clock descended into the mine, but did not return, and early the next morning his dead body was found lying near the foot of the twelve steps, between a wall and the first railroad track, with a small cut on his forehead and a slight bruise or scratch on one cheek.
Citator
- Cited by
- 33 opinions
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Walling,Plaintiff’s husband, John J. Watkins, was working nights for the Pittsburgh Coal Company, defendant, at a. mine and while his main work was in the boiler house his duty also required him each night to go down into the mine pit and look after the pumps. To do so he
Appellant’s sole contention is that there is no evidence to sustain the finding of accidental death. In this class of cases our revisory powers are limited to such consideration of the record as will enable us to ascertain whether there is evidence to support the findings and, if so, whether the law has been properly applied: Kuca v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co., 268 Pa. 163; Stahl v. Watson Coal Co., 268 Pa. 452. Assuming the accuracy of the doctor’s opinion, the finding of the referee is warranted, for we have held that death resulting from a strain upon the heart caused by overlifting is an accident (Tracey v. Phila. & Reading C. & I. Co., 270 Pa. 65) and it is no less so when caused by overexertion in climbing eighty feet up a
A claimant is required to show the death was accidental, but not the precise nature of the accident: Laraio v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 277 Pa. 382; Zelazny v. Seneca Coal Mining Co. et al., 275 Pa. 397. It clearly appears the deceased sustained a fall, and this may have caused death by á brain lesion or some other injury; so, in addition to the question of heart strain, the circumstances tend to support the finding of an accidental death.
The judgment is affirmed.