Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Russo v. Wright Aeronautical Corp.

Decided: July 15, 1948.

ANTIMO RUSSO, PROSECUTOR,
v.
WRIGHT AERONAUTICAL CORPORATION, RESPONDENT



On certiorari.

For the prosecutor, Isadore Rabinowitz & Nathan Rabinowitz.

For the respondent, John W. Taylor.

Before Justices Bodine, Heher and Wachenfeld.

Bodine

The opinion of the court was delivered by

BODINE, J. In the Workmen's Compensation Bureau, the prosecutor and his widow had judgment for injuries suffered by him arising out of and in the course of his employment, and suffered by her by reason of his death as a result of the accident

Antimo Russo, the workman, had been employed only after a thorough physical examination. He was then a man twenty-eight years of age, weighing about 200 pounds and, so far as was known, enjoying good health.

His duty was to pack airplane engines. While working at the defendant's plant, he suffered a serious wrenching of his body when the dolly, on which he was pushing a plane engine, struck a crevice in the floor and he was thrown backwards. After the occurrence he did some work at the plant, but not steadily, until May 27th. From then until May 16th, 1946, the date of his death, the testimony indicates a history of suffering, hospitalization, surgery and X-ray treatments.

The formal petition was filed November 30th, 1943. The accident occurred in May of 1943. In the course of the trial, the proofs indicated that the accident caused an aggravation of a previous cancerous condition from which the man died.

The Workmen's Compensation Bureau permitted an amendment, and it is claimed that this was error and the basis of the claim is Gurzo v. American Smelting and Refining Co., 132 N.J.L. 485. We think not. The pleader in the Bureau is not held to the strict rules of the common law. Prino v. Austin Co., 120 Id. 19.

The only other question in the case is whether the medical testimony sustained the findings of the Bureau. From a very careful examination of that testimony, we are constrained to find that the proofs clearly show that the injuries

and death were caused as found. Suffice it that the proofs clearly show that the end results could have been caused as testified to by the medical ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.