Opinion
February 20, 1962
Present — Bergan, P.J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision and award of the Workmen's Compensation Board. Claimant, a 32-year-old truck driver, on January 22, 1959 was dispatched by appellant employer from Yonkers, New York, to make deliveries and pickups of television tubes in Virginia. The trip which was not too arduous was, however, fraught with irritations and delays. On January 25, 1959 while claimant was returning via the New Jersey Turnpike, an electrical fire started under the dashboard causing flames, sparks and considerable smoke. Claimant who was dozing at the time was awakened by his companion who was driving. When he saw the fire he attempted to leap from the truck although it was traveling at 50 miles per hour at the time and was apparently only prevented in doing so by the fact that his door would not open. His companion finally pulled out the wires and eased the truck to the side of the highway. After being escorted to a rest area by a State trooper, claimant and his companion repaired the defective wiring, and as soon as the repairs had been completed resumed their journey with claimant at the wheel. Approximately 15 minutes later and roughly 45 minutes after the outbreak of the electrical fire, claimant complained of pain in his chest and difficulty in breathing. The companion took over driving and when claimant's condition became worse stopped at a rest area. Oxygen was administered at the rest area, an ambulance was called and claimant was hospitalized with a diagnosis of myocardial infarction. The board found on the basis of these facts plus expert testimony as to causal relationship that "claimant's myocardial infarction resulted from the exertion of long hours of driving, the emotional strains imposed on claimant by the delays enroute, the fear and excitement brought about by being routed out of sleep by the fire, and the continuance of work after such shock." Appellants assert that the record does not support the finding of an accident. We cannot agree. In Matter of Schwartz v. Hampton House Management Corp. ( 15 A.D.2d 936) we held that an emotional traumatic experience can constitute an accident. While Schwartz involved a prolonged period of anxiety, we see no reason why a sudden emotional experience resulting in a physical disability cannot also constitute an accident. It is undisputed that claimant while dozing next to the driver was suddenly awakened to find the truck on fire and that his reactions were impulsive and indicative of fright. On the present record we cannot say that this experience did not constitute an accident. The medical evidence although conflicting on the question of causal relationship is sufficient to support the board's finding in claimant's favor ( Matter of Palermo v. Gallucci Sons, 5 N.Y.2d 529). Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen's Compensation Board.