From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glick v. Wright Aeronautical Corp.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Sep 17, 1946
48 A.2d 792 (N.J. 1946)

Opinion

Argued May 7, 1946 —

Decided September 17, 1946.

Where in a workmen's compensation case there is no testimony to substantiate a definite traumatic episode and the proof is barren of the specific time or occasion when the alleged accident occurred, there is no accident within the meaning of the Compensation Act.

On certiorari.

Before Justices BODINE, PERSKIE and WACHENFELD.

For the prosecutor, David Cohn.

For the respondent, John W. Taylor.


This is a workmen's compensation case. The award made by the Bureau was reversed by the Passaic County Court of Common Pleas.

Prosecutor began his employment with respondent as a polisher in May, 1942, and for a period of eleven weeks thereafter operated a polishing machine, which because of a worn-out bearing vibrated excessively causing a jarring of his hand as he applied objects to the wheel and as a result thereof he developed a weakness in his left hand. On June 3d 1942, while polishing a six pound rod, prosecutor's machine jammed causing the bar to slip and strike the back of his hand.

His petition claimed partial disability arising from the blow on June 3d 1942. After the hearing before the Bureau, he amended his petition to allege the injury arose out of repeated jarring from the machine in May, 1942, upon which basis the award was made.

Examination of the record indicates the injury sustained did not result from an "accident" as required by R.S. 34:15-1. The proof shows the injury was caused by repeated jarring of the hand from excessive vibration, a fact admitted by petitioner through his amendment. There is no proof as to the time or the occasion when the accident occurred. Liondale Bleach Works v. Riker, 85 N.J.L. 426; Smith v. International High, c., Co., 98 Id. 574; Bollinger v. Wagaraw Building Supply Co., 122 Id. 512; Dawson v. E.J. Brooks Co., 134 Id. 94.

Prosecutor relies on the following cases to support his claim: Elio v. Singer Manufacturing Co., 10 N.J. Mis. R. 606; Schafer v. Bernard, 18 Id. 119; Richter v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours Co., 118 N.J.L. 404 ; affirmed, 119 Id. 427; Mecca v. Phoenix Brass Fittings Corp., 124 Id. 6 . These are not in point since in each instance injury was shown to arise from definite incidents and occasions although the exact date was not known and remained unproved.

There is no testimony to substantiate a definite traumatic episode and the proof is barren of the specific time or occasion when the alleged accident occurred; there is, therefore, no accident within the meaning of the Compensation Act.

Judgment affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Glick v. Wright Aeronautical Corp.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Sep 17, 1946
48 A.2d 792 (N.J. 1946)
Case details for

Glick v. Wright Aeronautical Corp.

Case Details

Full title:SIMON F. GLICK, PETITIONER-PROSECUTOR, v. WRIGHT AERONAUTICAL CORP.…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Sep 17, 1946

Citations

48 A.2d 792 (N.J. 1946)
48 A.2d 792

Citing Cases

Tyler v. Atlantic City Sewerage Co.

Compensation can only be allowed where a definite event, apart from the resulting disability, can be fixed as…

Ptak v. General Electric Co.

" In Glick v. Wright Aeronautical Corp., 24 N.J. Misc. 94 ( C.P. 1945), affirmed 134 N.J.L. 436 ( Sup. Ct.…