LEWIS v ANACONDA COMPANY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 12296 I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STP-TE OF M N A A OTN 1972 REX LEWIS, P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t , -vs - THE ANACONDA COllPANY e t a 1. , Defendant and Respondent. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e T h i r d J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable Frank E. B l a i r , Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel o f Record: For A p p e l l a n t : Jack M. Scanlon a r g u e d , Anaconda, Montana, F o r Respondent: Henningsen and P u r c e l l - , B u t t e , Montana, Rex F. Henningsen a r g u e d , B u t t e , Montana. Submitted: October 1 8 , 1972 Decided 8flV2 4 Filed:qfp~t a.. ~ 9 1972 Mr. Chief J u s t i c e James T. Harrison delivered the Opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from a judgment entered i n t h e d i s t r i c t court of Deer Lodge County on April 22, 1972, following a ruling t h a t the second amended complaint f a i l e d t o s t a t e a cause of action; and the motion t o d i s miss i t , was granted without leave t o amend. I t appears t h a t on December 7 , 1960, p l a i n t i f f Lewis, an employee of the Anaconda Company, suffered an industrial accident resulting i n a fractured l e f t wrist and f r a c t u r e of both nasal bones. Lewis f i l e d his claim f o r compensation and received compensation payments of $229.44. On or about March 1 , 1961, Lewis a s s e r t s he had a discussion w i t h one John Emory, the claims manager of the Anaconda Company, and was advised t h a t upon his return t o work his benefits under the workmen's compensation a c t terminated and he should not see an attorney as there would be no need t o . Thereafter, i t i s alleged, John Emory drafted a petition f o r a lump sum settlement f o r $1,825, forged Lewis' name thereon, submitted the same t o the Industrial Accident Board and i t was approved on March 27, 1961 . On April 3, 1961, John Emory requested a check from the Butte claims o f f i c e f o r the $1,825 and i t was issued and Emory delivered t o the claims o f f i c e a release w i t h the forged signature of Lewis. Then, allegedly, Emory forged the name of Lewis t o the check and negotiated i t . Some years l a t e r , i n 1971, Lewis had another industrial accident and he was represented a t t h a t time by Jack M. Scanlon, Esq., as his attorney. In reviewing the claim f i l e this attorney discovered these f a c t s and notified Lewis i n March of 1971. Thereafter t h i s action was commenced seeking t o recover damages f o r fraudulent conversion by means of the forgery of his check f o r $1,825, praying f o r special damages of $9,028, $30,000 general damages f o r mental pain and anguish, with a second cause of action seeking exemplary damages in the amount of $400,000. The gravamen of p l a i n t i f f ' s contended cause of action i s t h a t by reason of h i s i n j u r i e s he was e n t i t l e d t o the lump sum settlement and was deprived of i t by the fraudulent actions of the agent of t h e defendant Anaconda Company. However, he did not have anything t o do w i t h the proceedings involving the p e t i t i o n f o r the lump s m settlement, i t s approval and payu ment of the amount approved. The d i s t r i c t judge i n his decision of April 18, 1972, on the motion t o dismiss p l a i n t i f f ' s second amended complaint, stated : "No where, e i t h e r i n the second amended complaint o r the deposition of the p l a i n t i f f , does i t appear t h a t he suffered the l o s s he complains of. He held good jobs during the 10 year i n t e r v a l ; was even examined by the Anaconda Company Medical S t a f f and placed back t o work on one occasion. N complaint was made o by him i n a l l of the 10 years. In h i s deposition he says he breaths w i t h d i f f i c u l t y through one side of h i s nose, but a t no time has he sought medical care f o r i t o r any condition about which he complains i n this action. "Moreover, he has had no medical opinion t o the e f f e c t t h a t he has a 25 per cent permanent d i s a b i l i t y as a r e s u l t of the industrial accident occuring December 27, 1960. " I t seems t o us t h a t i f he had a 25 per cent permanent d i s a b i l i t y , i t would have shown up i n a ten year period and t h a t he would have sought competent medical help a t some time during t h a t period. "No medical opinion presently e x i s t s t o the e f f e c t t h a t p l a i n t i f f ever suffered a 25 per cent permanent or p a r t i a l d i s a b i l i t y . "Finally, there is no c l e a r allegation t h a t t h e plaint i f f ever suffered o r now s u f f e r s a 25 per cent permanent, p a r t i a l d i s a b i l i t y in the complaint as a r e s u l t of the injury he received December 27, 1960. * * *" There must be a determination by the Industrial Accident Board a s t o whether or n o t Lewis was e n t i t l e d t o any f u r t h e r compensation or t o a lump sum settlement f o r his i n j u r i e s , (Section 92-821, R.C.M. 1947.) P l a i n t i f f wants t o r e l y upon the alleged forged documents a s establishing his r i g h t s under the workmen's compensation a c t , b u t i n this position he i s clearly i n error. Before any form of re1 i e f can be considered i t i s incumbent upon him t o s a t i s f y the Industrial Accident Board t h a t he was e n t i t l e d t o such f u r t h e r compensation. W held i n P r o f i t t v . J . G . Watts Const. Co., e 140 Mont. 265, 370 P.2d 878, t h a t our courts do not have j u r i s d i c t i o n t o make such a determination i n the f i r s t instance, there must be a previous hearing and finding by the Industrial Accident Board. Nothing herein con- tained shall bar subsequent action before the Industrial Accident Board. The decision of the d i s t r i c t court of April 18, 1972, was c o r r e c t and the judgment entered thereon W concur: e (
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
