DAVID M. WOOLIN & SON, INC., AND LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONERS,
v.
IRENE MCKAIN AND FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, RESPONDENTS

Fla. 3d DCA | 1959-03-26
No. 58-754
CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON, J., concur., DREW, E. HARRIS, Associate Judge, concurs specially.
110 So. 2d 92 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1959) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

DREW, E. HARRIS,

Associate Judge (concurring specially).

The crucial issue in this case cannot be decided on the testimony of the chiropractor and the medical doctor alone. There are other established facts which show, without material contradiction, an unbroken chain of circumstances and events which directly connect the injury with the death of the claimant; and the chain is a comparatively short one, with no patently weak links. An injury to the head January 23, 1957 followed by a series of headaches, nausea and confusion of mind, resulting in hospital confinement on January 31st and death on February 10th from cerebral hemorrhage. These facts, supported by the opinion of the chiropractor that death was the result of the injury1 were of greater probative force, in my opinion, than the expert opinion of the medical doctor to the contrary.

I am of the opinion that the Deputy Commissioner’s findings were not only supported by substantial competent evidence that comports with logic and reason but that the clear preponderance of the evidence required such result.

I, therefore, concur in denial of certio-rari.

Concurrence
DREW, E. HARRIS,

Associate Judge (concurring specially).

The crucial issue in this case cannot be decided on the testimony of the chiropractor and the medical doctor alone. There are other established facts which show, without material contradiction, an unbroken chain of circumstances and events which directly connect the injury with the death of the claimant; and the chain is a comparatively short one, with no patently weak links. An injury to the head January 23, 1957 followed by a series of headaches, nausea and confusion of mind, resulting in hospital confinement on January 31st and death on February 10th from cerebral hemorrhage. These facts, supported by the opinion of the chiropractor that death was the result of the injury1 were of greater probative force, in my opinion, than the expert opinion of the medical doctor to the contrary.

I am of the opinion that the Deputy Commissioner’s findings were not only supported by substantial competent evidence that comports with logic and reason but that the clear preponderance of the evidence required such result.

I, therefore, concur in denial of certiorari.

. No objection was ever made as to the competency of the chiropractor’s testimony. As a matter of fact, the record shows a ready acceptance of his qualifications by employer’s counsel.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Andrews v. C.B.S. Division, 118 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 1960)
    …and the cause remanded for compliance with the statutory requirements, either with or without a new hearing of the parties as the circumstances may require. This view is the accepted rule.” . Cf. David M. Woolin & Son, Inc. v. McKain, Fla.App.1959, 110 So. 2d 92. . Particularly the uncontradicted evidence of claimant and the three other physicians who testified. . DeGroot v. Sheffield, Fla.1957, 95 So. 2d 912, at page 916: “ * * * evidence relied upon to sustain the ultimate finding should be sufficientl…
  • …leg, and, brother, when that hit you I mean you come away from there. * * * ” . Lyng v. Rao, Fla.1954, 72 So. 2d 53, 56. . Ibid. . Andrews v. G. B. S. Division, etc., Fla.1960, 118 So. 2d 206; David M. Woolin & Son, Inc. v. McKain, Fla.App.1959, 110 So. 2d 92.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw