Blackburn v. Coffeyville Vitrified Brick & Tile Co.

Citations

• 107 Kan. 722
• 193 P. 351
• 1920 Kan. LEXIS 155

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Compensation Act — Injury Arose “in Course of Plaintiff’s Employment.’’ The evidence in a workmen’s compensation case is considered and held sufficient to sustain a finding that a disease from which the plaintiff suffers was the result of an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment.</p> <p>2. Same — Existing Disease Aggravated by Accident to Workman — Compensation for Resulting Injury. Following Monson v. Battelle, 102 Kan. 208, 170 Pac. 801, and Gilliland v. Cement Co., 104 Kan. 771, 180 Pac. 793, it is held that if by weakening resistance or otherwise an accident so contributes to or influences the progress of an existing disease as to cause a disability, it is sufficient to justify an award under the workmen’s compensation act.</p> <p>3. Same — Aggravation of Existing Disease — Findings—Instructions. In a workman’s compensation case there was evidence to sustain a finding that the plaintiff’s injury contributed to and aggravated the disease of multiple sclerosis from which it is conceded he suffered. The jury found that the plaintiff’s injury had precipitated or contributed to the development of his present condition and also that it was. fully responsible for that condition. Held, that any inconsistency in these findings is explained by an error (not complained of by either party) in the giving of an instruction which charged that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover for an aggravation of a disease he may have had prior to receiving the injury; and further held, that the error should be disregarded and the general findings and judgment upheld.</p> <p>4. Same — Petition—No Material Variance Between Pleading and Proof. Ordinarily the issues in a .^compensation case are simple and, except for certain facts which the statute makes essential, the pleadings are of little importance. Where the petition charges incapacity resulting from an accident, the employer may not unreasonably be expected to meet evidence s