FORT LAUDERDALE TRANSIT LINES AND GUARANTY SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONERS,
v.
JAMES H. BASS AND THE FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, RESPONDENTS

Fla. | 1968-01-24
No. 36436
CALDWELL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
206 So. 2d 390 Florida Supreme Court (1968) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

A bus driver suffered a heart attack while operating a manual transmission bus, claiming it was caused by difficulty shifting gears. The Florida Supreme Court held that the injury is not compensable under workers' compensation law because the activity (occasional gear shifting difficulty) was routine to his 19-year employment, and the evidence did not meet the standard of 'competent and substantial' proof of causation.


Holding

The Court held that the injury is not compensable because the claimant failed to meet the legal standard requiring proof of unusual strain or over-exertion not routine to his type of work. Occasional difficulty with gear shifting was routine to a bus driver's 19-year employment, and the evidence did not meet the 'competent and substantial' standard of proof.


Key Quotes

“When disabling heart attacks are involved and where such heart conditions are precipitated by work-connected exertion affecting a pre-existing non-disabling heart disease, said injuries are compensable only if the employee was at the time subject to unusual strain or over-exertion not routine to the type of work he was accustomed to performing.”

Establishes the legal standard for compensability of heart attacks in workers' compensation cases with pre-existing conditions

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

James Bass, a bus driver employed for 19 years primarily operating automatic transmission buses, was called in on short notice to drive a manual trans…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
DREW, Justice.

DREW, Justice.

The controlling question in this compensation case is whether the heart attack suffered by the bus driver claimant1 arose out of and in the course of his employment. The deputy found that it did, attributed 70% of the loss to an admittedly pre-existing arteriosclerosis and entered his award for 30% of claimant’s compensation rate, 30% of medical, hospital and medication costs and costs, reserving the question of attorneys’ fees and other proper charges until maximum medical improvement was attained by claimant. The full commission affirmed without comment.

Claimant usually operated buses with automatic transmissions. He had on previous occasions over the years operated buses with manual transmissions.2 On the day in question he had been called to drive “a couple of hours” because of shortage of help and, although he had worked his full daily schedule the day before, finishing at 11:30 p. m., he agreed to do so and commenced the run in the manual shift *391bus at 7:45 a. m.3 Almost immediately after leaving' the terminal, according to claimant, he experienced difficulty with shifting gears. The trouble continued for several blocks when claimant became “dizzy, or paralyzed, blacked out, fainted” and ran the bus into a wall where he was immediately found and removed — unconscious —to a hospital.4

The only other evidence in the record concerning the transmission was that of the dispatcher and the mechanic in charge of “preventive maintenance” of the employer. The dispatcher testified that immediately after the accident he drove the bus back to the garage for inspection and that he experienced no difficulty in shifting the gears through all speeds. The other witness testified that on the following day he checked the bus out “ * * * the clutch, and shifting, and drive it around and drive it into the pit and check [ed] it over” ; that he had no difficulty shifting gears. He said, “when I road tested it I bad no trouble with it”. There is no evidence — except claimant’s — to the contrary.

“ * * * When disabling heart attacks are involved and where such heart conditions are precipitated by work-connected exertion affecting a pre-existing non-disabling heart disease, said injuries are compensable only if the employee was at the time subject to unusual strain or over-exertion not routine to the type of work he was accustomed to performing.”

Great reliance must in each case of this nature be given the deputy’s findings of fact when supported by competent, substantial evidence. But in this case the problem is simplified by the fact that here the evidence of claimant himself establishes the keystone fact that the activity engaged in by claimant when- the event for which compensation is sought took place, was usual and the alleged overexertion was routine to the employment. Such being the facts, the injury is not compensable under the act as construed by this Court.5 The claimant had operated buses for 19 years and, we can imagine nothing more common to a bus driver’s employment than occasional difficulty with shifting gears. It might be said that such events — when and if they occurred — were inherent in the employment. Moreover it seems quite clear to us that verity may be attributed to not *392only claimant’s testimony as to the difficulty of shifting gears but also the testimony of the dispatcher and the preventive maintenance foreman by concluding that the heart attack suffered by claimant produced the difficulty in shifting gears rather than —as claimant claims — the gear shifting difficulty produced the attack. It is simply a case where the evidence produced does not as a matter of law measure up to the standard of “competent and substantial.”6

Certiorari is granted, the order of the full commission is quashed and the cause remanded with directions to quash the deputy’s order and direct dismissal of the claim.

It is so ordered.

CALDWELL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and THORNAL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Richard E. Mosca & Co., Inc. v. Mosca, 362 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. 1978)
    …t unusual for claimant to stack as many as 100 to 125 cases in a day. A heart attack suffered by the bus driver claimant while experiencing trouble shifting the gears of a bus was held not to be compensable in Fort Lauderdale Transit Lines v. Bass, 206 So. 2d 390 (Fla.1968). Although claimant usually operated buses with automatic transmissions, he had, in the past, operated buses with manual transmissions. We held that the activity in which claimant was engaged at the time of the incident was usual and the a…
  • Skinner v. First Fla. Bldg. Corp. & U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 490 So. 2d 1367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
    …as a carpenter and was performing a task “very usual and routine to the position for which he had been hired” at the time of his accident. In so holding, the deputy analogized this case to the circumstances in Fort Lauderdale Transit Lines v. Bass, 206 So. 2d 390 (FIa.1968), and distinguished the case of Armour and Company v. Cannon, 384 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), relied on by claimants. Claimants now argue that Bass is not analogous since it did not utilize the “clear-cut interpretation” of Victor Wine…
  • …he employee was at the time subject to unusual strain or overexertion not routine to the type of work he was accustomed to performing. Victor Wine & Liquor, Inc. v. Beasley, Fla.1961, 141 So. 2d 581; Fort Lauderdale Transit Lines v. Bass, Fla. 1968, 206 So. 2d 390. But in this case, although the evidence was conflicting upon this point, the Judge resolved the conflicts in favor of the claimant and found that the activity preceding his heart attack constituted unusual exertion not routine to the type of work h…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw