Opinion
37861.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 24, 1959.
Workmen's compensation. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Pye. June 16, 1959.
Harry E. Monroe, for plaintiffs in error.
Scott Walters, Jr., contra.
While this court is fully aware of that line of cases exemplified by Fireman's Fund Indem. Co. v. Peeples, 97 Ga. App. 896 ( 104 S.E.2d 664), and Atlanta Transit System v. Harcourt, 94 Ga. App. 503 ( 95 S.E.2d 41), to the effect that "a mere narrative of the testimony of the witnesses is not a compliance with the [State Workmen's Compensation] act because it is the duty of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation to weigh the evidence and decide what are the true facts" ( Atlanta Transit System case) and to the effect that "`an award of compensation cannot be lawfully based on mere findings as to what the witnesses testified in the absence of other specific findings of fact which would otherwise support an award'" ( Peeples case), an examination of the deputy director's finding of fact, which is appended hereto, will reveal that although he summarized the evidence of the various witnesses who testified on the hearing, he also made the requisite findings, which were uncontradicted by any evidence adduced on the hearing, that the claimant, though suffering from certain enumerated afflictions, was not suffering from any disability connected with her injury, which had been sustained some four months earlier, and that none of her suffering at the time compensation payments were discontinued on May 28, 1958, or at the time of the hearing on July 31, 1958, was connected with the injury sustained in her employment; and, that consequently her claim for further compensation was unjustified and denied. The superior court, therefore, erred in reversing the award denying further compensation. Williams v. Travelers Ins. Co., 41 Ga. App. 362 ( 153 S.E. 77); Employers Liability Assur. Corp. v. Montgomery, 45 Ga. App. 634 (2) ( 165 S.E. 903); Maryland Cas. Corp. v. Mitchell, 83 Ga. App. 99 ( 62 S.E.2d 415).
Judgment reversed. Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 24, 1959.
On September 24, 1958, one of the deputy directors of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation made the following finding of fact and award: "This case came on to be heard July 31, 1958, before the undersigned to determine extent of disability. The records in the case reveal that Mrs. I. V. Alford was employed by Fulton Bag Cotton Mills at an average weekly wage of $36.43 and that she sustained an injury on the job April 2, 1958, and an agreement was filed by the parties and compensation of $21.80 per week was commenced on April 9, 1958, and was paid through May 28, 1958, when Dr. York examined her and found in his opinion that she was able to return to work. The claimant testified in her behalf and a neighbor of hers testified in her behalf and Dr. Jesse H. York, Dr. M. L. B. Clarke and Dr. William Bondurant testified in the case and the evidence shows that she had several different complaints; one was that she was bleeding and on examination it was found that she was suffering from hemorrhoids which had no connection with the injury. From Dr. Bondurant's evidence she had a condition of an aching shoulder which was not caused by the injury and she was a lady advanced in years and the evidence indicated that she was having some trouble or troubles not associated with or caused by the injury and she was so far as the injury was concerned able to return to work at the time compensation was discontinued. I have given careful and sympathetic study to this case and find as a matter of fact that any disability that the claimant is suffering from or has suffered from since the date her compensation payments were discontinued are not connected with the injury and that her claim for further compensation is not justified and must be denied . . . Wherefore, based on the above findings of fact the claim of Mrs. I. V. Alford vs. Fulton Bag Cotton Mills, employer, and/or Michigan Mutual Liability Company, insurance carrier, for further compensation is denied."
An endeavor to appeal the award to the board for review was refused as not having been filed within the requisite seven-day period for which provision is made in Code § 114-708. The claimant thereupon proceeded with a timely appeal for review to the Superior Court of Fulton County under the terms of Code § 114-710, alleging that the facts found by the director did not support the order or decree; that there is not sufficient competent evidence in the record to warrant the director's making the order or decree of which complaint is made; and that the order or decree is contrary to law.
The superior court entered the following judgment on appeal: "Ground 1 of Mrs. Alford's appeal is: `1. The facts found by the director did not support the order or decree.' There are no findings of fact except the following ultimate finding: `I have given very careful and sympathetic study to this case and find as a matter of fact that any disability that the claimant is suffering from or has suffered from since the date her compensation payments were discontinued is not connected with the injury and that her claim for further compensation is not justified and must be denied.' The director not having made any findings of fact to support this ultimate finding, it is considered ordered, and adjudged by the court that the award appealed from be and the same is hereby set aside, and the case is remanded for hearing de novo. Firemen's Fund Indemnity Co. v. Peeples, 97 Ga. App. 896; Atlanta Transit Co. v. Harcourt, 94 Ga. App. 503."
From this judgment the insurance carrier has entered the present appeal to this court.