STAMATIS v BECHTEL POWER CORP
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 14756 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1979 ODESSEY S. STAMATIS (Fatal), JESSIE M. STAMATIS, Claimant and Appellant, BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION, Employer, and INDUSTRIAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent. Appeal from: Workers' Compensation Court Honorable William E. Hunt, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Lewis E. Brueggemann argued, Billings, Montana For Respondent : Marra, Wenz, Iwen and Johnson, Great Falls, Montana Charles R. Johnson argued, Great Falls, Montana Submitted: Decided: September 20, 1979 OCT 2 : 7979 C h i e f J u s t i c e F r a n k I. H a s w e l l d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e Court. Mr. C l a i m a n t a p p e a l s f r o m a judgment o f t h e W o r k e r s ' Compensation C o u r t d e n y i n g Workers' Compensation b e n e f i t s f o r t h e d e a t h o f h e r husband. We affirm. C l a i m a n t ' s h u s b a n d , O d e s s e y S. S t a m a t i s , was e m p l o y e d a s a n e l e c t r i c i a n by B e c h t e l Power C o r p o r a t i o n a t a p l a n t n e a r C o l s t r i p , Montana, o n March 3 , 1 9 7 6 . H e c o l l a p s e d on t h e j o b , was t a k e n by a m b u l a n c e t o a F o r s y t h h o s p i t a l , and was p r o n o u n c e d d e a d o n a r r i v a l . H i s widow f i l e d a c l a i m f o r b e n e f i t s u n d e r t h e W o r k e r s ' C o m p e n s a t i o n A c t a g a i n s t I n d u s t r i a l I n s u r a n c e Company, B e c h t e l ' s P l a n I1 c a r r i e r . A h e a r i n g was h e l d b e f o r e t h e W o r k e r s ' C o m p e n s a t i o n C o u r t a t w h i c h much c o n f l i c t i n g e v i d e n c e was i n t r o d u c e d by t h e r e s p e c t i v e p a r t i e s . R o d e r i c k S w i t z e r , a f e l l o w employee o f d e c e d e n t , t e s t i f i e d t h e y s p e n t t h e morning of h i s d e a t h i n s t a l l i n g c o n d u i t s e c t i o n s w e i g h i n g 1 0 t o 1 5 p o u n d s a p i e c e and p u l l i n g s e v e r a l w i r e s t h r o u g h 50 t o 1 0 0 f e e t o f t h e c o n d u i t . Switzer i n d i c a t e d t h i s was v e r y s t r e n u o u s work i n v o l v i n g l i f t i n g w i t h y o u r w h o l e body on a p u l l f r o m b e l o w y o u r k n e e s and c r a w l i n g t h r o u g h a s p a c e o f a b o u t t h r e e f e e t between t h e f l o o r and b o t t o m o f a g e n e r a t o r i n t h e work a r e a . Switzer t e s t i f i e d he d i d n o t t a k e h i s l u n c h b r e a k w i t h d e c e d e n t , b u t t h a t when h e r e t u r n e d t o work t h e r e a f t e r h e saw d e c e d e n t c o l l a p s e a s h e p i c k e d up some m a t e r i a l s f r o m a work b e n c h . The o t h e r v e r s i o n o f w h a t h a p p e n e d o n t h e d a y o f d e c e d e n t ' s d e a t h came f r o m t h e t e s t i m o n y o f Gordon Z i e g e l d o r f , a f e l l o w employee, and Michael L a s l o v i c h , d e c e d e n t ' s foreman. Z i e g e l d o r f t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e a n d d e c e d e n t worked t o g e t h e r t h a t day c a r r y i n g l i g h t f i x t u r e s from a warehouse i n t o t h e B e c h t e l p l a n t a n d c l e a n i n g them p r e p a r a t o r y t o i n s t a l l a t i o n . This activity involved walking 50 to 100 yards from the plant to the warehouse, carrying a single light fixture weighing about 20 pounds back to the plant each trip, loading the fixtures on an elevator that transported them to the 120 foot level of the plant, and cleaning them with soap and water at the 120 foot level. Ziegeldorf testified the work was not strenuous, did not involve heavy lifting, and did not involve climbing stairs. According to Ziegeldorf, decedent at no time complained that the work was tiring or causing him any physical discomfort. Decedent and Ziegeldorf took a coffee break at about 2:30 in the afternoon and as they were returning to work thereafter, decedent collapsed while walking ahead of Ziegeldorf and fell back into his arms. Foreman Laslovich recalled that decedent worked with Ziegeldorf on the day of his death stocking and cleaning light fixtures. Laslovich testified that he saw decedent collapse in Ziegeldorf's arms as the men walked back to work following the afternoon coffee break. He stated that it was customary to assign decedent nonstrenuous jobs like bringing up fixtures because of decedent's age. The foreman never recalled assigning decedent to install conduit or pull wire, but admits decedent could have performed that type of work since his job as foreman did not require him to continuously supervise the men under him. After decedent collapsed, first aid consisting of cardiopulmonary resuscitation was administered on the job site. Decedent was taken by ambulance to a hospital in Forsyth, a distance of about 35 miles. Dr. Deone Hanson pronounced decedent dead on arrival at 4 : 4 5 p.m. The Rosebud County coroner examined the body and determined the cause of death to be acute coronary thrombosis. The coroner testified his examination was not extensive enough to rule out the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t decedent d i e d of myocardial i n f a r c t i o n r a t h e r than coronary thrombosis. N o a u t o p s y was p e r f o r m e d , The body was c r e m a t e d . The r e c o r d s h o w s t h a t d e c e d e n t w a s a l a r g e man s t a n d i n g 6 ' 2 " a n d w e i g h i n g 250 p o u n d s . H e was 5 4 y e a r s o l d a t t h e t i m e o f h i s d e a t h and had no p a s t m e d i c a l h i s t o r y o f h e a r t H e smoked t w o p a c k s o f c i g a r e t t e s a d a y a n d h a d disease. been smoking s i n c e a g e 13. I n t h e month p r e c e d i n g h i s d e a t h , d e c e d e n t h a d worked 2 1 s h i f t s t o t a l l i n g 1 9 0 h o u r s f o r a n average of about nine hours p e r s h i f t . The S a t u r d a y b e f o r e h e d i e d , F e b r u a r y 28, h e worked a n e i g h t - h o u r o v e r t i m e s h i f t . On t h e d a y o f h i s d e a t h , t h e t e m p e r a t u r e a t C o l s t r i p , a f e w m i l e s f r o m t h e B e c h t e l p l a n t r e c o r d e d a h i g h o f +18OF a n d a l o w o f -18OF, The t e m p e r a t u r e i n s i d e t h e p l a n t was somewhere b e t w e e n +40°F a n d +50°F. The m e d i c a l t e s t i m o n y c o n f l i c t e d a t s e v e r a l p o i n t s . Dr. Walter Degnan, a c a r d i o l o g i s t , t e s t i f i e d by d e p o s i t i o n t h a t d e c e d e n t d i e d o f w h a t i s m e d i c a l l y known a s sudden d e a t h . Sudden d e a t h o c c u r s when t h e p a t i e n t d i e s w i t h i n s e v e r a l h o u r s o f t h e o n s e t o f symptoms a n d i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y r e l a t e d t o c o r o n a r y d i s e a s e 80 p e r c e n t o f t h e t i m e . According t o D r . Degnan s u d d e n d e a t h f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r s w i t h o u t t r a u m a t i c c a u s e o r p r e v i o u s symptoms. The d o c t o r t e s t i f i e d t h a t while unusual s t r a i n increases t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of sudden d e a t h , normal e x e r t i o n w i l l n o t produce a h e a r t attack. H e d i d n o t f e e l t h a t t h e temperature t h e day of d e c e d e n t ' s d e a t h had any r e l a t i o n s h i p t o h i s d e a t h . Responding t o a h y p o t h e t i c a l q u e s t i o n b a s e d on t h e e f f e c t o f s t o c k i n g a n d c l e a n i n g l i g h t f i x t u r e s by a man o f d e c e d e n t ' s a g e a n d physical condition, Dr. Degnan t e s t i f i e d t h a t e x e r t i o n w a s not a causal f a c t o r i n h i s death. Dr. P a t r i c k Byorth, a s p e c i a l i s t i n i n t e r n a l medicine, was also deposed. He agreed that decedent died from sudden death and that sudden death is related to a coronary incident in 80 percent of the cases. However, his opinion was that vigorous physical activity precipitated the heart problems. Responding to a hypothetical question encompassing the facts testified by witness Switzer, Dr. Byorth stated physical exercise was a probable contributing factor to decedent's death. When presented with a hypothetical question positing facts similar to the testimony of witnesses Ziegeldorf and Laslovich, Dr. Byorth testified that the physical exertion involved in decedent's activities contributed to precipitating the heart attack. The doctor further testified that working in cold weather could contribute to a heart attack. The essence of the findings of fact by the Workersv Compensation Court was that decedent had been engaged in the task of cleaning light fixtures in the few hours prior to his collapse after a coffee break at approximately 2:45 p.m. on March 3, 1976, and that his activity was not of a strenuous physical nature, nor was it unusual, nor was the outside air temperature a factor in precipitating his collapse. The gist of the court's conclusions of law was that the preponderance of competent and credible evidence failed to sustain a conclusion that decedent suffered a compensable injury as defined in the Workersv Compensation Act. Judgment was entered denying claimant any benefits thereunder or attorney fees. Two issues are presented for review in this appeal: 1. The sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings of the Workers1 Compensation Court. 2 . Did decedent suffer a compensable injury under the Workers' Compensation Act? The test of sufficiency of the evidence is whether there is substantial evidence supporting the court's findings of fact. Head v. Larson (1979), Mont. , 592 P.2d 507, 510, 36 St.Rep. 571, 575; Strandberg v. Reber Company (1978), Mon t . , 587 P.2d 18, 20, 35 St.Rep. 1742, 1745; Jensen v Zook Bros. Construction Co. (1978), . P.2d 1191, 1193, 35 St.Rep. 1066, 1068. Mon t . , 582 This Court will not substitute its judgment for that of the Workers' Compensation Court concerning the credibility of the witnesses or the weight to be given their testimony. Construction Co. (1979), Dumont v. Wickens Bros. Mont. , 598 P.2d 1099, 1106, 36 St.Rep. 1471, 1479-1480; Steffes v. 93 Leasing Co., Inc. . Mon t (1978)I , 580 P.2d 450, 452-453, 35 St.Rep, 816, Mont . 818; Crittendon v. City of Butte (1977, , 559 P.2d 816, 817,/34 St.Rep. 3, 4. Thus, where the findlngs are b - n ao conflicting evidence, our function of review is confined to determining whether there is substantial evidence supporting such findings. Jensen, supra, 582 P.2d at 1194. Conversely, our function is not to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support contrary findings. Here the evidence is conflicting concerning the cause of death. Claimant's witnesses testified decedent performed strenuous physical activity on the job prior to his death and the exertion had a causal connection with his death. Respondent's witnesses testified that decedent did nothing strenuous or unusual and that his activities on the job in the hours preceding his death had no causal relationship to his collapse and subsequent death. The Workers' Compensation Court found respondents' witnesses more credible, gave greater weight to their testimony, and entered findings accordingly. Substantial evidence supporting such findings is found in the testimony of Ziegeldorf, Laslovich, and Dr. Degnan, summarized previously. The second issue for review is whether decedent suffered a compensable injury under the Workers' Compensation Act. question has two facets: This (1) Did decedent suffer an injury as defined by the Act? to decedent's death? (2) Was such injury causally related Dumont, supra, 598 P.2d at 1106-1109. The Act in pertinent part defines an injury in this language: "'Injury' or 'injured' means: "(1) a tangible happening of a traumatic nature from an unexpected cause or unusual strain resulting in either external or internal physical harm and such physical condition as a result Section 39-71-119(1), MCA. therefrom . . ." We have previously interpreted this language to mean that a claimant can recover if the physical harm suffered is unusual either from the standpoint of cause or effect. Love v. Ralph's Food Store (1973), 163 Mont. 234, 242, 516 ~ . 2 d598, 602; Robins v. Ogle (1971), 157 Mont. 328, 333, 485 P.2d 692, 695; Jones v. Bair's Cafe (1968), 152 Mont. 13, 19, 445 P.2d 923, 926. However, claimant must still prove a tangible happening of a traumatic nature. Dumont v. Wickens Bros. Construction Co., supra, 598 P.2d at 1108; Erhart v. Great Western Sugar Company (1976), 169 Mont. 375, 380-381, 546 P.2d 1055, 1058; Hurlbut v. Vollstedt Kerr Company (1975), 167 Mont. 303, 306-307, 538 P.2d 344, 346. We have explained the meaning of a tangible happening of a traumatic nature in these words. "A tangible happening must be a perceptible happening. [Citations omitted.] Some action or incident, or chain of actions or incidents, must be shown which may be perceived as a contributing cause of the resulting injury. This court has found neurosis compensable, but a tangible, real happening must be the cause of the condition [Citations omitted.] In the recent case of Love where a gradual buildup of back pain was found compensable, this Court emphasized two specific incidents of strain were perceptible from the record." Erhart, supra, 169 Mont. at 381. ... Here, there is no tangible happening of a traumatic nature. The Workers' Compensation Court found that claimant had been engaged in cleaning light fixtures preceding his collapse and that this activity was not of a strenuous physical nature, nor unusual, nor was the outside air temperature a factor in precipitating his collapse. Taking this view of the facts, there is simply no evidence in the record of any real, perceptible or identifiable incident, action or happening of a traumatic nature within the definition of injury in the Act. Finding no injury, the required causal connection likewise fails. Accordingly, we hold there is no compensable injury as defined in the Workers' Compensation Act. Affirmed. Chief Justice Justices I
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.
