Gretchen Turner v. J. P. Mills Company
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 98-CC-00773-COA
GRETCHEN TURNER
v.
J. P. MILLS COMPANY AND FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY
APPELLANT
APPELLEES
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
04/17/1998
TRIAL JUDGE:
HON. BARRY W. FORD
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
GARY L. CARNATHAN
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES:
GEORGE E. READ
J. KEITH PEARSON
NATURE OF THE CASE:
CIVIL - WORKERS' COMPENSATION
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
CIRCUIT COURT AFFIRMED DENIAL OF WORKERS'
COMPENSATION BENEFITS.
DISPOSITION:
AFFIRMED - 04/20/99
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: 5/6/99
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
7/13/99
BEFORE McMILLIN, C.J., KING, P.J. AND DIAZ, J.
McMILLIN, C.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1. Gretchen Turner filed a petition to controvert with the Mississippi Workers' Compensation Commission
alleging that she suffered a disabling work-related injury. Her alleged injury was described as a heart attack
suffered while at work and attributable to the extraordinary stresses of her employment with the J.P. Mills
Company. The administrative judge found that Turner's heart attack was not connected to her employment
and denied her claim for compensation benefits. Turner appealed to the full Commission. That body
affirmed the administrative judge's decision, and, in a subsequent appeal to the Circuit Court of Lee County,
that court affirmed the Commission. Ms. Turner has perfected an appeal to this Court asking us to reverse
the circuit court's judgment. Finding no basis to do so, we affirm.
I.
Facts
¶2. Turner's employer, J. P. Mills, operates a number of convenience stores in the Lee County area. Turner
was employed by the company in July 1994, and had worked for a total of 47 days before suffering her
heart attack. At the time of her attack, she was working as a store manager. She claimed that, in that
position, she was subjected to extraordinary stress. She attributed the stress to long hours caused by (a) the
company's failure to provide her with adequate staffing and (b) working multiple shifts when other
employees failed to report for duty.
¶3. However, there was evidence that Turner had been treated by a general practitioner for heart problems
before her employment with J.P. Mills began. Turner's complaints to her treating physician included a report
of reoccurring chest pains that began before 1989. The physician had diagnosed her to have high
cholesterol, high blood pressure, and a heart murmur.
¶4. Three physicians testified as to their opinion of the cause of Turner's heart attack. Two were
cardiologists and the other was Turner's treating general practitioner. Both cardiologists testified that
Turner's heart problems were traceable to (a) a history of smoking since she was fifteen to sixteen years
old, (b) high blood pressure, and (c) a family history of heart problems on both sides of her family. Both
cardiologists stated that stress was not generally considered a major risk factor in contributing to heart
attacks of the nature suffered by Turner. Turner's general practitioner testified that work stress could elevate
a person's blood pressure to a level which could predispose a person to heart disease, but, when offered
the chance to choose between saying that job-related stress possibly contributed to her attack or probably
did so, he refused to characterize his opinion as going beyond a mere possibility. The administrative judge
found, based on the testimony of the cardiologists, that Turner "did not prove by a preponderance of the
evidence that her myocardial infarction arose out of her employment." The full Commission adopted the
administrative judge's conclusions and affirmed his decision denying benefits.
¶5. Turner presents only one issue on appeal.
II.
Did the Commission Err in Finding Turner's Heart Attack Was Not Job-Related?
¶6. This Court has limited authority to review the decisions of the Mississippi Workers' Compensation
Commission. For purposes of our analysis in this case, we may overturn the Commission's decision only if it
is manifestly wrong as not being supported by substantial evidence in the record. Trest v. B.C. Rogers
Processors Inc., 592 So. 2d 110, 113 (Miss. 1991).
¶7. Turner had the burden of proving a causal connection between her employment and her heart attack.
Ingalls Shipbuilding Corp. v. Howell, 221 Miss. 824, 830, 74 So. 2d 863, 864-65 (1954). In cases
such as this, medical proof is essential to establish the necessary causation. Kersh v. Greenville Sheet
Metal Works, 192 So. 2d 266, 268 (Miss. 1966). In Kersh, the Mississippi Supreme Court said:
In heart cases, it is said that the burden, as usual, is upon the claimant and that the rule of liberality
cannot dispense with the necessity of proof of facts prerequisite to recovery and that causal
connection is one of such facts. The factual issue on this score is usually one for the medical experts
and the Commission as triers of the facts, and the Commission may not award compensation in the
absence of medical proof to show causal connection. The issue in heart cases is not such as may be
resolved upon common or judicial knowledge and this is so although the medical testimony contains
an admission of a possibility of causal connection. (emphasis added).
Id. (quoting Dunn, Mississippi Workmen's Compensation § 52 (1957).
¶8. This Court has thoroughly reviewed the record in this case, giving particular attention to the testimony of
all three medical experts. The largely uncontradicted and unimpeached testimony of the two experts in the
field of cardiology indicated that Turner's heart attack was due to hereditary and behavioral factors not
related to her work. The only medical evidence in opposition to this testimony was Turner's treating
physician's assertion that job-related stress was a possible contributing factor to her attack. We are
satisfied that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Commission's determination that
Turner failed to show a causal connection between her work and her heart attack. For that reason, we
conclude that the decision to deny her compensation benefits should be affirmed.
¶9. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LEE COUNTY AFFIRMING THE
FINDINGS OF THE MISSISSIPPI WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
DENYING WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO GRETCHEN TURNER IS
AFFIRMED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, COLEMAN, DIAZ, IRVING, LEE, PAYNE,
AND THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
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.