Document renLqwkkEeV4pRna4anbbqg6q

FILE NAME: Contract Unit Workers Comp Claims (WCC) DATE: 1953 DOC#: WCC021 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Workers Comp File - Hyatt, Floyd Contains all documents found in the Claimant's file, with one blank page between each separate document  sufficiently .4 crimination-. tes a policy ,tion of the aracter runs ted doctrine ' not per1 sc I y to well es- t be accom- c.ense. A li- I 1 al of a right and tlie -.mmensurate 0. the business fi ' *t Chesney, 97 ;v c. O'Connell, .*f Lir. Licenses* .. Law*. Sec- i : v.-ould im- -.anitting es- ; for a year's to include SI, ; cf.'cots i ^ enter'ain- - in r.r.y brink-permit- - on-live enter- i. for exampic, nic recordings entertainment a flagrant pro of establish- appellants' and ..enable to regu- dment thus ini,dated with the legislation debe accomplished within the police .ie methods proHy objectionable ary, a denial of vs, and not truly real purpose of .aw, Sections 302- HYATT v. ARMS lltONG CORK COMPANY . Citeos, ria., 121 So.2 d703 Fla. 793 Notwithstanding the broad discretionary power of the legislature to license and reg ulate business establishments affecting the public interest, the wide disparities in the' operative effect of this amendment impel' the conclusion that it clearly transgresses permissible legislative discretion. Section 5, Chapter 59-316, Laws of Florida 1959, compiled as Section 561.34(13) (a), Florida Statutes 1959, F.S.A., is, therefore, invalid and its provisions unenforceable. Though we do not treat of the title we are impelled to observe that it approaches dan gerously a form that might, upon scrutiny, result in a declaration that it offends against Sec. 16, Art. I ll, supra. The decree appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded for proceedings consistent herewith. PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of the application of Joe E. Hodges, of Lake City, Florida, a member of The Florida Bar, for leave to resign from The Florida Bar without lea ye to be reinstated and the written objections of the Florida Bar thereto, it is ordered that said application be, and it is, hereby denied. In re Harper, Fla.I956, 84 So.2d 700, 54 A.L.R.2d 1272. Copies of this order shall be forwarded to the applicant and The Florida Bar by the Clerk of this Court. - THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB SON, DREW and THORNAL, JJ., concur. Reversed. THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB SON, ROBERTS, THORNAL and O'CONNELL, JJ., concur. Floyd HYATT, Petitioner, Joe E. HODGES, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, ex rei. FLORIDA BAR, Respondent. No. 29368. Supreme Court of Florida. June 29, 1960. A case o f original jurisdiction--Petition for resignation from the Florida Bar.' Joe E. Hodges, Fort Lauderdale, in pro. per., for petitioner. Marshall R. Casscdy, Tallahassee, for respondent. 121 So.2d--50% ARMSTRONG CORK COMPANY, Standard Accident insurance Company, and Flori da Industrial Commission, Respondents. Supreme Court of Florida. April 13, I960. Adhered to on Rehearing July IS, I960. Workmen's compensation proceeding. Employer's insurance carrier disclaimed liability for further benefits in excess of compensation paid in the aggregate sum of $5,000, and to review an order of Florida Industrial Commission denying further compensation, claimant brought certiorari. The Supreme Court, Terrell, J., held that the aggregate compensation payable for total disability due to asbestosis was lim ited to $5,000 by provisions of Workmen's Compensation Law, F.S.A. 440.20(13), in effect at time of last injurious exposure in August, 1945, thogh such limitation had 794 Fia. 121 SOUTHERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES been repealed before claimant became total ly disabled in August, 1953. ' Writ of certiorari denied. cd his employment. He secured employ ment with other employers until August 12, 1953, at which time his illness had pro gressed to the point that he was forced to cease work and has since been totally dis 1. Workmen's Compensation C=>392 Workmen's Compensation Law is no tice of its provisions to employer and em ployees alike and constitutes a contract with employer, employee and insurance carrier abled. In November, 1952, he bad a chest x-ray made and was told that he had silico sis. He became a patient of Dr. Brunner, the County Health Doctor, and filed claim, for silicosis. once the parties have accepted provisions -..Jiugu st. 31, 1953, 4 jy a ) tw a s examined' of the law. . by Dr., I .' B, -Cippcs-and, was ttpl4thatJi&j 2. W o r k m e n 's Compensat ion 0=>9 p|t'ad- .asbestosis."'"" Sep'temhcr^l7^.195^be p-filed-claim therefor, requesting .that itjerv.c. Workmen's Compen-a'ion Law in ef i pas notice to th e 'c a r r ie r of ..knowledge of fect at time of employment is part of con t"Jns .condition and disahihty as of August tract of crwTvmcnt. ; 12, 19o3.fi A hearing v us had by tlic 3. Wor kme n' s Compensat ion C=60 Aggregate compensation payable for total disability due to asbestosis v.-as limited bv pro''i?'r''' c of Workmen's Compensation no5.re in ..eim, 19-5, to $5,900 in addi- The earner ujuteiibi-d t'.i.it the c'.vu v.as barred by the statute of Lniiatlous because the claimant had not gb. en notice to bis employer within the trim alloue.; bv ;tat- ;d jam.,.-} id, !?o4. The 1'op.:;/ Con.- ; ,;,or. b:.c alcd be lore. cT. became total!}' disabled m At gust, 1953, and the law the:: ... cnee: pros uietl tkr.i. payments for total disability should not be ir.rtdc .r, excess of 700 weeks. F.S.A. 4-10.15(1) (a), 440.151(6) (c), (7), 440.20 (13). Lucille Snowden and Kaplan & Ser, Miami, for petitioner. Dixon, Dejarnette, Bradford, Williams, McKay & Kimbrell and Guy A. Gladson, Jr., Miami, Burnis T. Coleman, and Paul E. Speh, Tallahassee, for respondents. TERRELL, Justice. .Floyd Hyatt was employed by Armstrong Cork Company at McCloskey Shipyard, Tampa, Florida, from January 29, 1944, to August 13, 1945. While so employed he contracted asbestosis. He was last ex posed August 13, 1945, the day he termiuat- comc aware of the nature of the injury or occupational discerne >:nti' August 31, 1553. although his last injurious exposure was in 1945. The Deputy Commissioner award ed the claimant permanent total compensa tion benefits from August 16, 1953. From the said order the carrier appeal ed to the full Commission which on May 4, 1954, found that the contention of the employer that the statute of limitations had run against the claim was not well founded. Tire full Commission also found that the statute of limitations in existence in 1953 (two years) and not the one year period of the 1945 Act controlled. The following portion of the order of the full Commission, is pertinent and is as follows: "Certainly the two year period for filing a claim under Section 440.19 had not expired upon the date that the claim was filed. The time of injury for an occupational disease is the date of an employee's becoming actually in- ** . b c .r.p'.oyvusl 12. prn' reed to,.!ly disa chest d sihco:'.runner, e-\ claim - am sued mat he '53, he serve ' - oi m5 \ arci- on May i of the ions had founded. ,,hat the in 1953 period of following mrnission od for -MO. 19 mat theary for date of Oily iriT 4 t `I \ "1 9 4 & 'I . > v V, { > i , 1 i ' r 4 HYATT v. ARMSTRONG CORK COMPANY C i t e its, r i d . , 121 So.2d 70S Fla. 795 capacitated. The claimant was not to tally incapacitated by the occupational disease of asbestosis, as is required be fore compensation can be paid under section 440.151(6) (c), until August 12, 1953. Claim was filed on September 1, 1953, and notice given to the em ployer on September 9, 1953. As stated above, the two year period for filing a claim is satisfied and the re quirement of notice within ninety days to the employer under section 440.151 (7) is also fulfilled." In 1957, having paid claimant $5,000, the carrier terminated payments of compensa tion to him. The carrier contended that its responsibility to the claimant was con trolled by the 1945 law. A claim v,as then fi'ed charg:: g that the carrier erred in not applying the 1951-1953 law. The 1945 law limited compensation for permanent total disability to 55,000. The 1953 law, 440.15 (1) fa), provides: adjudged to a '.aid zo : n: c;np.o>, c ouring the contu'.nance of such total c'-ab:!:ty; our :n no event shall such payments be mane in excess yf seven hundred (700) weeks." A hearing was held on May 12, 1958. -on the claim for further benefits above $5,000. At the hearing it was stipulated that the only issue would be a question of 'law, to-wit: Whether or not the 1945 law or the 1953 law ought to be applicable to the case. It was further agreed that ttie cause be adjudicated on the basis of memo randa of law to be submitted. Accord ingly the Deputy Commissioner entered an order dated May 22, 1959, interpreting the full Commission's order as contended by the claimant and not by the carrier. Said order reads in part as follows: "That although the claimant was last injuriously exposed to the substance causing his silicosis in 1945, he actual ly became incapacitated as a result of this disease on August 12, 1953. In an earlier decision in this case, the Full Florida Industrial Commission stated `the time of the injury for an occupational disease is the date of an employee's becoming actually incapaci tated.' At the time of the claimant's injury, the Statute in existence would spell out the benefits to which he would be entitled. On August 31, 1953, the Workmen's Compensation Law pro vided benefits to the claimant for per manent total disability amounting to 700 weeks. It follows, therefore, that the carrier erred in terminating bene fits to the claimant in 1957, after the payment of $5,000.00." Pursuant to said order the carrier was directed to pay- the claimant compensation for 700 v, eeks disability at the rate of $22 per week commencing August 16, 1953. From said order, the carrier ap pealed to the full Commission. November 19, 1959 ot tm Co: order of the Deputy e M i ir - -:o.-ier or. the ground ti the 19-15 ..- -- law . i nx Imi con: order on Prd.-.os V. City est Palm Reach, r la 1953, 70 Commis- sioner w alter !... L i the full Commission, holding that the award of benefits was controlled by the 1953 law because claimant's injury did not occur until after the effective date of said law, consequently the Phillips case had no ap plication. From the said order we are con fronted with an appeal by certiorari. The parties are not in agreement as to questions presented. The majority of the Commission found that the sole issue was one of law, that is, whether claimant's benefits are those authorized by the 1945 law or those authorized by the 1953 law, when claimant became permanently dis abled. We understand that petitioner is in substantial accord with the majority of the Commission as to the question pre sented. Respondents raise the additional queries: (1) If the question stated in Point One was adjudicated in the employee's y *. *{ ^ '4-T ;:!l:i!'iif XP1- aWfC W M.VW'V'-; 796 ria. 121 SOUTHERN' REPORTER, 2d SERIES favor in the 1954 proceeding, can it be readjudicatcd at the present time? (2) As suming that the employee's benefits arc to be measured by the law in effect at the time of his disability, does 440.151(6) (c), Florida Statutes 1953, F.S.A., permit payment of compensation benefits in ex cess of $5,350? We accept the question stated by the majority of the Commission, being substan tially in accord with that stated by peti tioner, as being the primary question pre sented. We do this because our answer comprehends all questions argued. Section 440.20(13), Florida Statutes 1945, F.S.A., provides: "The total comper.s.'bon payable un der this chapter Lr d-mb'hp. am; dcat'i shell ir. no <_vcwt exmed t w -mV. of five thousand dollars in add tom to any benefits under 4-10 13 for medi cal services ar.d t-e.itmmt and dm feet at the time of employment is part of the contract of employment. Section 440.151(6) (c), Workmen's Compensation Act, fixes liability for disability resulting from silicosis and asbestosis. In this case claim ant was not totally disabled until August 1953, so he would be entitled to payments under the Act from July 1945 ta August 1953 as the Act provides. The Act pro vides, however, that, "Such progressive increase ir. the ' limits to the aggregate compcnsatior and benefits for disability and death shall continue until the limit upon such benefits fixed in this woikm.cn's com pensation law is reached.'' [3] From this it seems m idevt ti :t increase in total compensation greater man that provided in 440 20(13) which limits compensation recoverable to $5,0.'0, did Law r.ot'Cc o: constitutes a contract with the employer, the employ, e and the insurance carrier w ee the parties have accepted the provisions of the law. Hardware Mutual Casualty Coin pany v. Carlton, 1942, 151 Fla. 233, 9 S 2d 359; Stansell v. Marlin, 1943, 153 Fla. 421, 14 So.2d S92. [2] It is also settled in this state that the Workmen's Compensation Law in ef- the Commission fw :u! t rat conwwLci by i'hih.p.-, v. i. Palm Beach, Fla.1953, 70 S v.c 11r i -t.\cry aic c c .; ecu cr.sc v.a ci VA; 345, an 1'o -- It follows that the writ of certiorari is hereby denied. THOMAS, C. and HOBSON, THORNAL and O'CONNELL, JJ., con cur. if k if I FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION DIVISION TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA Decision No. Subject File .1- * .,, 2-880 P*"f. 7 Nos, B-35; B-55 CLAIM NO.i S-85602 DATE OF ACCIDENT: August 12, 1953 EMPLOYEE: FLOYD HYATT, c/o Kaplan & Ser 808 Seybold Building Miami 32, Florida Represented by: Lucille Snowden and Messrs. Kaplan & Ser 808 Seybold Building Miami 32, Florida EMPLOYER: ARMSTRONG CORK COMPANY Lancaster Pennsylvania CARRIER: STANDARD ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY 320 Miracle Mile Coral Gables, Florida Represented by: Messrs. Dixon, DeJarnette, Bradford, Williams, McKay & Kimbrell 908 Ainsley Building Miami, Florida COMPENSATION ORDER OF FULL COMMISSION This cause came on to be heard upon application of the employer and carrier for review of an Order of the Deputy Commissioner dated May 22, 1959, awarding the claimant compensation for permanent total disability for a period of 700 weeks. Claimant was employed by the Armstrong Cork Company from Janu ary 29, 1944 to August 13, 1945, as a building mechanic engaged in ./ S-85602 ( ORIGINAL the erection of insulating material. In this occupation, the claim ant contracted asbestosis. The claimant, subsequent to August 13, 1945, worked for several employers, but was not exposed to asbestos fumes. On August 12, 1953, the illness had progressed to a point where the claimant was forced to terminate his employment. Since that date, he has been permanently and totally disabled. On Sep tember 1, 1953, the claimant filed a claim for workmen's compensa tion benefits and the Deputy Commissioner awarded the claimant compensation for permanent total disability. This Order of the Deputy Commissioner was affirmed by the full Commission and no appeal from the full Commission's Order was taken. Pursuant to the award of compensation by the Deputy Commissioner, the insurance carrier paid the claimant the sum of $5,000 at the rate of $22 per week, the maximum rate of compensation payable under the Workmen's Compensation Law at the time of claimant's last exposure to asbes tos' fumes. After the insurance carrier had paid the sum of $5,000 in compensation benefits to the claimant, payment of compensation was terminated. Thereafter, the claimant filed a claim, contending that he was entitled to 700 weeks1 compensation, which is the maxi mum payable under the law existing in 1953. The Deputy Commissioner agreed with this point of view and awarded the claimant compensation for 700 w e eks. The employer and carrier have applied for a review from said Order of the Deputy Commissioner, urging essentially that the Order of the Deputy is contrary to the law and that such Order is in violation of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W orkmen's Compensation Division S -8 5 6 0 2 ORIGINAL the Constitution of the United States. The sole issue on this review is one of law, that is, whether claimant's benefits are those provided by the 1945 law or those authorized under the 1953 law, when the claimant became permanently disabled. Section 440.20(13), Florida Statutes, (1945), provides, viz. : ''The total compensation payable under this chapter for disability and death shall in.no event exceed the sum of five thousand dollars in addition to any benefits under Chapter 440.13 for medical services and treatment and under subsection (1) of Section 440.16 for funeral expenses." Section 440.15 of the 1953 provides, in part, as follows, viz.: "Compensation for disability shall be paid to the employee . . . (1) PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY: (a) In case of total disability adjudged to be permanent, sixty per cent of the average weekly wages shall be paid to the employee during the continuance of such total disability; but in no event shall such payments be made in excess of seven hundred (700) weeks." In our opinion, the case of Phillips v. City of West Palm Beach; Fla, 1953, 70 So. 2d 345, is controlling. In the Phillips case, claimant's injury occurred in July 1945 and compensation was paid, howeyer, in 1951 the injured foot was amputated and additional compensation was paid for the permanent disability occurring in 1951, The 1945 law provided payment of compensation should not exceed $5,000. The claimant contended that the 1951 law was ap plicable and he should receive compensation for his permanent disa bility in accordance with the latter law since his permanent disa- * 4 bility did not occur until 1951. The Court, in rejecting the claimant's contention, stated, viz.: FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workman's Compensation Division S -8 5 6 0 2 ORIGINAL "To hold that Chapter 26877, 2 of the Laws of 1951 is retroactive would make it a violation of Section 10, Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States and constitute it in impairment of the obligation of contract." It has long been established in Florida that the Act itself is I notice of its provisions to employers and employees alike and that same constitutes a contract between the employer and employee, and insurance carrier, if one, once the parties have accepted the pro visions of the Act. (See Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Carlton, Fla. 1942, 9 So. 2d 359j Stansell v. Marlin, Fla. 1943, 14- So. 2d 392} Williams v. American Surety C o ., Fla. App. 1958, 99 So. 2d 877./ It is clearly apparent from the law as stated by our appellate courts that the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Law in ef fect at the time of employment become a part of the contract of em ployment, Section 440.151(6)(c) of the 1945 Workmen's Compensation [aw, provides a definite amount of liability for disability result ing from silicosis and asbestosis by providing a total sum for such Usability in the amount of $500 if the disability occurred in July 3f 1945, the month in which this particular provision had its ef fective- date. The Act further provided additional amounts to be paid in the amount of $50 per month, which is added to the $500 from July 1945 until the time the asbestosis became totally disabling. In the instant cause, the claimant was not totally disabled until August of 1953 and the maximum amount he would be entitled to- would ae $500 plus $50 per month from July 1945 until August 1 9 5 3 or a 3um of $5,350. However, in the same section of the Act, the follow ing is stated: "Such progressive increase in the limits to the aggregate FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W orkmen's Compensation Divlaion S-8 5 6 0 2 ( ORIGINAL compensation and benefits for disability and death shall continue until the limit upon such benefits fixed in this Workmen's Compensation Law is reached." It is clear that the legislature did not, in providing for the progressive increase of compensation, intend to increase the total amount of compensation payable greater than that provided in Sectioi 440.20(13), which limits the compensation recoverable to $5,000. In our opinion, the Deputy Commissioner erred, as a matter of law and the claim for additional compensation benefits must be dismisses. Having considered the cause upon the record, briefs, and oral argument of counsel for the parties and it appearing that the Order of the Deputy Commissioner does not comply with the essential requirements of law, it is ORDERED that said Order of the Deputy Commissioner dated May 22, 1959, be and the same is hereby reversed and said claim for additional workmen's compensation benefits be and the same is herebv^dismlssed^. DONE AND ORDERED at Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this November 19 , A. D. 1959. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION y r , SEAL': FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W o rk m en 's Co m pen sation Division S -8 5 6 0 2 ORIGINAL DISSENT I cannot agree with the conclusions reached by the majority oi my colleagues. It is the general principle of Workmen's Compensation Law that the law in force at the time of an injury or accident govern 3 the rights of the parties. This poses the question as to what con stitutes the time of injury where we have an occupational disease. Section 440.151(1)(a), Florida Statutes, states in part, viz.: ''Where the employer and employee are subject to the provisions of the workmen's compensation law, the disable ment or death of an employee resulting from an occupational disease as hereinafter defined shall be treated as the happening of an injury by accident . . . " / l/ Section 440.151(6)(a), provides, in part, viz.: ''Disability from silicosis, asbestosis, or any dust disease . . . shall be allowed only when the employee is incapacitated from performing any remunerative employment." (Emphasis Supplied). In the instant cause, the claimant, under the terms of the statute, was not disabled until August 1953 and no other conclusion can be drawn. The employer and carrier urged that an application of a 1953 law would be retroactive in the violation of state and federal constitutional provisions. They also rely upon the case of Phillips v. City of West Palm Beach, Fla. 1953, 70 So. 2d 345. It should be noted that the court, in the Phillips case, stated the following: ''The acceptance of application of workmen's compensation statutes by the employer, employee, and insurance carrier constitutes a contract between the parties embracing the provisions of the statutes as they exist at the time of any injury compensable under teiros of statutes." (Emphasis Supplied), / In the instant cause, by the terms of Section 440.151, the compensable injury did not occur until August of 1953. The facts in FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workmen' Compensation Division ORIGINAL 85602 the instant cause are analagous with those existing in the case of Semon v. George H. Flenn Corp., 166 NYS 2d 835, wherein the New York board allowed the claimant a higher rate of compensation although the injurious exposure occurred prior to his disablement and at a time when the compensation rate was lower. It is further noted that Section 38 of the New York Compensation Law is almost identical to our Florida section, 440.151(1)(a). The New York section has the following language, viz.: "The 'disablement' from an occupational disease 'shall be treated* as the happening of an accident." The New York court had this to say, viz.; "It is the date of disablement and not the date of last exposure which is controlling. In occupational diseases, the time of contraction is sometimes unknown and its development may be a slow process. For this reason the disablement is regarded as the 'accident' and the right to compensation in such a case depends on the disablement." As stated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case of Pekoraf- sky v. Glen Alden Coal C o ., 89 A. 2d 890, viz.: "The liability of employer to pay compensation is fixed as of the day of last exposure while the duty to make such payments and the amount thereof becomes fixed upon the date when disability occurs." ^Emphasis Supplied). For the above reasons, I would affirm the Order of the Deputy Commissioner. cc: Floyd Hyatt Lucille Snowden Kaplan & Ser Armstrong Cork Co. Standard Accident Ins. Co. Dixon, DeJarnette, Bradford, Deputy MacKenzie Williams, McKay & Kimbrell FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W orkmen' Compensation Division /jwb This is to certify that on this, a b o v ^ ^ r a S - H 'l e d T n - tAe'of l l c f o f the Florida Industrial Commission at Tallahassee and a copy sent by certified mail to each interested party at his last known address. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION BY / e / - P . /4 '' \ \ FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workmen's Compensation Division 25 I3 FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION DIVISION TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CLAIM NO: SW SS02 DATE OF ACCIDENT A n g tta t 1 2 , EMPLOYEE: FLOYD K7ATT c / o aj>last & S e r SOS Soybold Buildias U la n i 32 F lo r id a 195 3 Represented by: L S C IU L S SROSDiSS &jmS KAPLA3 & 8 0 3 S ey b o ld B u ild in g B ia a i 32 F lo r id a EMPLOYER: AWTE&&Q c o m cmpj&x L an caster P en n sy lv a n ia CARRIER: STAKDASD ACCXDLST XK50LASCE CG2PASY 320 H ir e d B ile C o ra l C a b lo , F lo r id a Represented by: discs , soJAsarm; & n&i&gom A iB ly B u ild in g Hiftl, Florida W.C.L. Form No. COPT COMPENSATION ORDER BY BCBTOK 2. COHO, DEPUTY CCHHISSIOHES . UX&Ut, FLORIDA W. C. L. Form No. \Z COPY 'S s CU 6I tt s ff I 8 a %u k After considering the Briefs sod t&e legs! question vr I s k W. C. L. Form No. 12 COPY S % It *ui a M a FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W o r k m e n 's C o m p e n s a tio n Division t 3 >0. o J Claia o. S-05SO* Floyd Hyatt vs Armstrong Corte Company 3 Pay the cost In this proceeding. 0S3 iUSD 02EEI> at Siasi, Florida, this of Hay, 10&3. vU? -- day iSUL} OC: P a rtie s // Sert* tt* *&# cesiipeputy Co^&XssI^i^r ~ Florida Industrial Ctramissioa This is to certify that the foregoing Order as stored oa the day of Hay, ISSs and that a copy thereof vas sent on said date by certified sail to the claimant and to the employer at the last fcaesa address of each. Florida Industrial Cosaissiiea Hyt fmZ . g. gesgravs___ Secretary' F o r m No. 12 FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workmen's Compensation Division HOME OFFICE OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE 3 FIDELITY AND SURETY BONDS BURGLARY AND GLASS INSURANCE V-L. P. SHRIVER AGENCY GENERAL AQENTS 1801 UNION BANK BUILDING P I T T S B U R G H 22 April 14, 195& TELEPHONE G R A N T 1-7800 Mr. R. C. Schiedt, Jr. Insurance Department Armstrong Cork Company Lancaster, Pennsylvania ^ < u Re: Floyd Hyatt - Florida Workmen^ Compensatioh Claim Dear Dick: Thank you for your letter enclosing the Notice of Hearing on the above claim. With kindest personal regards, I am Very truly yours, BRS:esm / April 11, 195 Mr* B. R. Shrirer V. 1* P. ShriTer Agency li)l Baton Bemk Building Pittsburgh 22, Pa* Daar Bari Subjects Floyd Hyatt - Florida Workmen's Compensation Clala Ve presume Standard Accident Insurance Company recelTed a notice of the hearing May 12, 195, but just in ease, ve enclose a oopy. Yery truly yours, JEZ 55aclosure It. C* Schledt, lr. Insurance Department FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION CLAIMANT IS REQUIRED April 7______________ _ 1 g 58 TO BE PRESENT AND 1050 Seybold Bldg._________ PREPARED TO TESTIFY Miami 32, F l a . Office of/fche Deputy Commissioner INITIAL NOTICE OF HEARING, Claim No. 3 -8 5 6 0 2 DA 1944 & 1945 Carr. #76-C-488988 Employee. FLOYD HYATT,c/o Kaplan k Ser Attorney for * 3E R . 8 0 8 Seybold Bldg., Miami 3 2 , ? ! . Employer. ARMSTRONG CORK CO., Lancaster, Pa. Insurer. STANDARD ACCIDENT INS. CO., 1120 Ponce deLeon Boulevard, CraTTGables, Fla.----------------------------------------- Attorney for Employer or Insurer. TO THE PARTIES A D D R E SSE D : A hearing will be held in the above case at 1050 Seybold Blfe.. Miami, Fla. at 2 : 3 0 o'clock____ E-- M________ Monday, May 1 2 , 1 9 5 8 . ______________________________ THIS HEARING IS PART OF A SCHEDULE; IT CANNOT BE POSTPONED WITHOUT CONSIDER ABLE INCONVENIENCE AND EXTRA EXPENSE. POSTPONEMENT CANNOT BE HAD EXCEPT UPON STRICTLY LEGAL GROUNDS : SUBJECT OF HEARING (Here state question in dispute) To determine merits of claim for continued compensation benefits, attorneys* fees. 20% penalty and interest. T h ^ r H p ^ o ^ ii^ m ^ iiig ^ s h o u liI arrange to, h ^ e all^ j^ itn essg s^ p r^ n tto , testify promptly__at the time The right is reserved to take such action as the law permits if either party fails to appear at the time and place set for this hearing. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION CC: Parties - Certified to carrier ___ BURTON .M . COHKN____________ Deputy Commissioner FLO RID A IN D U STRIAL COMMISSION W O R K M E N 'S C O M P E N S A T I O N DIVISION TALLAHASSEE Say 4, 1954 Mr. Duane Anderson Dixon, DeJarnette & Bradlord Attorneys at Lav First National Bank Building Miami, Florida Re: Floyd Hyatt vs. Armstrong Cork Co. Claim No. S-85602 Dear Mr. Anderson: Enclosed is a copy of the Order of the Full Commission in the captioned cause, which was entered and copies mailed to the parties on May 4, 1954. Also enclosed are copies of (1) Rule No. 12 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure; and, (2) Rule No. 28 (e), (f) and (g) of the Supreme Court Rules. These items are not enclosed to encourage further litigation but are set forth merely to inform any party vho may desire to contest the decision of ..the Full Commission of the correct procedures to be follovedv -7 cc: Mr. Floyd Hyatt (Reg.) Miss Lucille Snovden Armstrong Cork Co. (Reg.) Standard Accident Ins. Co. Mr. George C. HcCaughan Florida Comp. Rating Bureau COPY FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION DIVISION TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CLAIM NO: S-85603 DATE OF ACCIDENT Auguat 31, EMPLOYEE : FLOYD HIATT c/o Lucille Snovdem SOS-810 Seybold Building Hlaal 32, Florida 195 3 Represented by: Lneille Saoeden Attom e y mt Lav > Slami 32, Florida CL o EMPLOYER: u s m m m coas c o s p a h y Laac&srter, PennaylTania CARRIER: STANDARD ACCIDENT INSCSNSCS CGSPAST 330 Miracle Kile Coral Gablern, Florida Represented by: Dixon, DeJaraett* & Bradford First National Bank Building Siam! 32, Florida COMPENSATION ORDER Of FULL COMMISSION This cause came on to be board upon application for review of an order by the deputy commissioner awarding compensation for tbs occupational disease of asbestoals* Thor* is substantial competent evidence in the record to support the order of the deputy* The employer contends that a statute of limitation has run against the claim* Certainly the !! Itwo year period for filing a claim under section 440*1$ had not I i!expired upon the date that the claim ires filed* The time of |injury for an occupational disease is the date of an employee's |becoming actually incapacitated* The claimant was not totally incapacitated by the occupational disease of ashestosis, as is ), !required before compensation can be paid under section 440.151 Ii i<6) <c until August 12, 1053* Claim mas filed on September 1lv 1053* sad notice given to the employer on September 0, 1053* As stated above, the too year period for filing a claim is satis i :fled and the requirement of notice within ninety days to the esploy- ier under section 440*151 (7) is also fulfilled* The employer contended, upon oral argt&ent, that since i ! |the legislature required death from an occupational disease to occur within three hundred fifty weeks after the last exposure to i jbe coa&ensable, then they could sot intend for mere disability to be compensable if it results after the three hundred fifty weeks* See section 440*151 <1) (a) This contention entirely overlooks the fact- that silicosis, asbestosis or aay dust diseases are treated separately in subsection sis of the occupational |disease portion of the lav. This section appears to recognise that these diseases usually develop over a period of years before they |become known* Therefore the provision in subsection six, that disability or death from f^ ^ ^ s|s al^ 1 1 snot be presumed to be due W O R K M A N 'S CO M PEN SA TIO N OIVISION to say occupation unions during the tea years preceding the date of disablement the esployse has been exposed to the dust over a period of sot less than five years refutes the employers argument in this regard Certainly the period of three hundred fifty seeks |as not meant to apply to a disease that ordinarily does not |to its appearance ksova before five to ten years after exposure* Although the scatter was sot broughtspecifically to our attention it appears fro a study of the record that there is no evidence to substantiate the deputy*# award of permanent total i idisability from the date of August 16 1952* 13 claimant first ;began to lose time frost work in October of 1952 by bis ovn :testimony So did not become totally disabled until August 12* 1953* and the order of the deputy appears to be in error in this 'regard* j Zt is thereupon, The Order at The Commission that the order of the deputy commissioner he and the same hereby is modified to indicate that i the claimant la entitled to permanent total disability compensation from august 19, 1953, at the rate of $22 par week rcther than from i the date of August 1$, 1952 It is further Ordered that the order of the deputy commissioner, other than as modified above*, be and the same hereby is affirmed* lit is further Ordered that the employer, by and through its carrier, shall pay to claimant's attorney the sum of Three Hundred Twenty- five Hollars ($325), vhich is a reasonable fee for representing the claimant in this cause before this Commission. Hone and Ordered at Tallahassee, loon County, Florida, this day of 4. D. 1954. r L O R lD S ! N O ^ T R M . C O M M IS S IO N W O R K M E N ' CO M PEN SA TIO N DIVISION (SUL) ' n m t D k IICD3TBIAL C322S$I0H /s/ James T. Vocelle j m s n r r v e e SM; GHairasa- / s / L . E . W eston cc: I I Floyd Hyatt Lucille Snowden Armstrong Cork Company Standard Accident Xnsnmace Company Dixon, DeJaraetto h Stradiord Deputy McCaugban Florida Coapens&tion Sating Bureau Tb4l-t&IsdtaoycoefrtifyyVthLa^t fon ibis, the 1954, Ibe albore Order van e&riered and a copy sent toy registered adii to each inter ested party nt his last known address I '\ F L 0 3 IB A IJO B S T E IA L *iV- i t SSIOBT .1 By mx}-- " 3 - FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W O R K M E N ' CO M PEN SA TIO N DIVISION FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA March 1, 1954 FILE NO: 170 RULE NO. 12 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES OF PROCEDURE; AND RULE 28 (e)(f) AND (g) OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES. SUPPLEMENT TO RULES OF PROCEDURE IN WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION CASES BEFORE THE FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSIOf IN REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 8, 1954. RULE NO. 12 Effective February 1, 1954 Record for Review by the Supreme Court; Petitioner to File Directions for Preparation of Transcript when Record Exceeds 75 pages. (a) When the original transcript of the proceeding before and the order of the Deputy Commissioner which were reviewed by the Full Commission, together with the originals of any motions or other instruments filed in connection with such review, and the original order of the Full Commission sought to be reviewed by writ of certiorari filed in the Supreme Court of Florida, exceed 75 pages, at the time copies of the petition are served upon the Commission and other parties, counsel for the petitioner shall file with the Commission written directions for the preparation of a transcript of such parts of the record as he deems essential to dispose of the question raised and shall serve a copy of such written directions upon each of said parties or their counsel. Within ten days after service of the petition on the Commission and other parties to the cause as required by rule of the Supreme Court, the Director of the Workmen's Compensation Division shall file in the Supreme Court a transcript of such parts of the record of the proceedings the petitioner seeks to have reviewed as counsel for petitioner shall have so directed. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workmen'* Compensation DlvUlon Tailaha**. Florid* (b) When any parts of the record not included in the transcript filed in the Supreme Court in accordance with the directions of the petitioner are deemed by opposing counsel to be necessary to the disposition of the question raised, opposing counsel may secure from the Commission for proffer in the Supreme Court a supplemental transcript of such other parts of the record as they deem necessary. (c) The party at whose direction such transcript or supplemental transcript is prepared shall pay to the Commission the cost of the preparation of same, which may be assessed as costs in the case, unless such party is relieved of paying same as provided in paragraph (c) of Rule No. 6. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workmen' Compensation Division Tallahassee, Florida I RULE NO. 28 (e)(f) AND (g) OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES "Certioraris in Industrial Cases "(e) Orders of the Florida Industrial Commission entered pursuant to Section 440.25, Florida Statutes 1951, as amended by Section 8, Chapter 28241, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1953, shall be reviewed only by writ of certiorari pursuant to Section 5, Article V of the Constitution upon a petition filed in this Court within sixty days from the date the order sought to be reviewed was entered. The petition by its nature amounts to a request to exercise the Court's discretion, and if granted, the questions raised will be determined. Being the order of a Commission exercising quasi judicial powers, the Court will not only determine whether or not the proceedings accord with the essential requirements of law, but if found to meet this test will then determine whether or not there is ; adequate, sufficient or substantial legal evidence to sustain | the findings of the Commission. The Court will not weigh the probative force of conflicting evidence but will confine its examination to the nature of the evidence relied on to sustain the order. If the petition is denied no opinion will be written. "(f) The Florida Industrial Commission shall be made a party respondent to every petition filed under this rule and at the time the petition is filed in the Supreme Court the j petitioner shall give notice thereof to the Industrial Commission j and other parties to the proceedings by serving a copy of the j petition upon each of said parties or their counsel, together I with a copy of the supporting brief of the petitioner. "Transcripts of Records in Industrial Cases "(g) Within ten days after service of the petition on the Industrial Commission and other parties to the cause as required by this rule, the Director of the Workmen's Compensation ) FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Workmen's Compensation Division Tallahassee, Florida Division shall transmit to the Supreme Court the original tran script of the proceeding before the Deputy Commissioner which was reviewed by the Full Commission, the originals of any motions, or other instruments filed in connection with such review by the Full Commission, and the original order of the Full Commission sought to be reviewed, which shall constitute the record-for-review by the Supreme Court; provided that such record be not over 75 pages. In the event it exceeds 75 pages, the Director of the Commission shall file in the Supreme Court a transcript of such parts of the record of the proceedings the petitioner seeks to have reviewed as counsel for petitioner deems essential to dis pose of the question raised. Unless shown by opposing counsel to be necessary, no other record shall be required." I 1 FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION W o rk m en ' Compensation Division Tallahassee, Florida 0 M F E R f l V J R . Chairman ot the Board R H PLATTS President F S B R O W N . V.ce Pres & Secretary L. K K I R K . Vice Pres & Tre asurer J P H A C K ER . Vice President P A U L W I L S O N . Vice Pres ide nt . A W A R N I C A . Vice P r e s id e n t P E LAYMON. Vice Pre side nt and Cenerai Counsel H A W H I T E . Vice President Standard A ccid en t In su ran ce Com pany I N C O R P O R A T CO I S I 4 CASUALTY I NS URANCE FIDELITY AND S URE T Y B O N D S Samuel. j . C a r r R ESID EN T V IC E-PR ESID EN T P hiladelphia B ranch O ffice STANDARD ACCIDENT BUILDING 214 SOUTH FIFTH ST. Philadelphia 6, Penna. A P R I L 7 1954 PHONE LO 3-8518 ARMSTRONG CORK CO. LANCASTER, PA. a t t : r. c . schiedt, jr. r e : our p i l e # f- a88988 ASSURED: ARMSTRONG CORK CO. INJURED: FLOYD HYATT a c c i d e n t : unknown DEAR S I R : IN REFERENCE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 29, 1954, INQUIRING AS TO WHETHER WE RECEIVED THE ASBESTOS P I P E COVERING, IT HAS BEEN RE CEIVED AMD WE ARE FORWARDING TO OUR FLORIDA OFFICE TO BE ANALYZED.' THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION IN THIS MATTER, I REMAIN, VERY TRULY YOURS, h j : fb CLAIMS REPRESENTATIVE Planet Insurance Company, Oetroit Standard Accident Insurance Company, Detroit Pilot Insurance Company, Toronto March 29 1954- Standard Accident Insurance Company 2 H South Fifth Street Philadelphia 6 Pennsylvania Gentlemen Attention Mr, H. Johnson Please let me know immediately if you have not received the pipe covering* 7arj truly yours ARMSTRONG CORK COMPAHT RCSjriNCR B, 0, Schiedt, Jr ' Tax Department 0 * P E R R Y . J R . . Chauman o< 1h* h o re R H PLATTS Pres.deni F S B R O W N , Vice Pr A Secretary L. K. K I R K . Vice Pres & Tre asurer J P H A C K ER . Vice President P A U L W I L S O N . V-ce P r e s i d e d C A W A R N I C A . Vice P res ide nt P . E LA VHO N. V.ce President end Cenerei Counsel H A W H I T E . Vice President Standard A ccid en t In su ran ce Com pany i N C O f t P O R AT ( 0 l i t CASUALTY I NSURANCE FIDELITY AND S URETY B O N D S SAM UEL J. CARR R E S ID E N T V IC E -PR E SID E N T Philadelphia Branch Office STANDARD A CCIDENT BUIt-DINO 214 SOUTH FIFTH ST. Philadelphia 6, Penna. PHONE LO 9-8818 Armstrong Cork Company Lancaster, Penna. March 15, I9 5 L Att: R. C. Schiedt, Jr. Tax Dept. Re: Our file F -488988 - Armstrong Cork Co. Floyd Hyatt Dear Mr. Scheldt: This will acknowledge receipt of yourletter of February 12, 195^, and I wish to take this opportunity to thank you for your cooperation. You requested that I let you know if we did not receive the pipe covering within a week, and inasmuch as a period of three weeks has now elapsed and we have not received the requested material, will you kindly check and see if the material has been shipped. Very truly yours, H. Johnson ~*~* Claim Repr. HH:dd Planet Insurance Company. Detroit Standard Accident Insurance Company, Detroit Pilot Insurance Company, Toronto /< \ February 12, 1954 t Standard Accident Insurance Company 2 H South Fifth St Philadelphia 6 Pennsylvania Gentlemen! Attention! -Hr H. Johnson In reply to your letter of February 11, I have arranged to send you a eeotion of the pipe covering requested Let me know if you d o n H receive it within a weck Very truly yours, ARMSTRONG COBS COMPACT RCSjrtNCR R C* Schledt, Jr* Tax Department > D. M F E R R Y J R . . Chapman of Hi* Board R. H PL A T T S . Prsident F S B R O W N . Vice Pr#s & Secretary L . K Kl R K . Vice Pres & Trea sur er J . P H A C K ER . Vice President P A U L W I L S O N . Vice President E A W A R N I C A , Vice Pre side nt P . E LAYMON, Vice President and Cenar} Counsel H. A W H I T E . Vice President Standard A ccid en t In su ran ce Com pany INCORPORATED 1884 CASUALTY I NSURANCE FIDELITY AND S URETY B O N D S SAMUEL J. CARR R e s id e n t V ic e -p r e s id e n t P hiladelphia B ranch O ffice ' STANDARD ACCIDENT BUILDING 214 SOUTH FIFTH ST. Philadelphia 6, Penna. PHONE LO 3-8518 Armstrong Cork Company Lancaster, Penna. February 11, 19 5 ^ *Att: G-eorge C. Scheldt, Jr. Tax Department Re: #1(68988 -- Armstrong Cork Co. -- Floyd 2ya1 Dear Sir: When I wrote you on December 1, 1953, requesting that if possible, you get a specimen of the type of asbeBtos covering used on the job which the Armstrong Cork Company did at the McCloskey Shipyard in I9lj.l1-and 19^5> in The state of Florida. We find that this material had originally been manufactured by the Heasby & Madison Company in Ambler, Ponna., and while I did approach them directly^ they felt that a request for the materiel, should be made by the Armstrong Cork Company. As you probably know, this case has rather serious potentialities, and if it is at all possible, we would like to get some of this asbestos material for analyzation purposes. If this material is not available at this time, however, it would be appreciated if you would advise the writer of same in order that I can communicate with our Florida Office and keep them abreast of this situation. rPViwnTflng you very much for your cooperation in this matter, I remain, Yours very truly, HJ:dd Planet Insurance Company. Oetroit Standard Accident Insurance Company, Detroit Pilot Insurance Company, Toronto 1 Armstrong Cork Company ( INCORPORATED) building m a ter ia ls CUSTOMER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT CONTRACT FOREMAN S d i v i s i o n , La n c a s t e r , p a . 4 D ISTR IC T-B R A N C H O FFIC E I OUR REQ. NO. j OUST. ORDER NO. F. O. B. / j DATE SOLD DATE REQUESTED ! DATE PROM ISED DATE SHIPPED ___ _____ 1 P0T1 1 l a n p - f l u i i s t ! ' ^ c r e d Tt a p p r o v e d TERM S A m bler * Pa* f / a b/lS/^L At once 1 __ SH IPPED FROM CA R N O .' AND IN ITIA LS' VIA " SA L ESM A N -O FFIC E ______ Ho Charge__ PR IC E LIST NO. W G T. & PIEC ES Ambler D EFEN SE ORDER NO. B est Way - Prepaid _________________________________ Z O N E -- r n SOLD Standard Accident Insurance TO 21k So. $th Street L Philadelphia 6 Pa. J o o r SHIP TO L SPE C I AL S IL L IN G A N D S H IP P IN G IN S T R U C T IO N S . SA LES AND U SE TAX- n Sane Attnt H* Johnson Claim Representative ................. TAX N O T A P P L I C A B L E .................N O T T A X A B L E - E X EM PT ................. N O T T A X A B L E - R E S A L E .................T A X A B L E - - A D D .. - . % .......... ........ TAX COM M ODITY CODE (P L A N T ) QUANTITY O RD ERED QUANTITY U N IT S PKGS. . i P t. 1 Se w* DESCRIPTION O N E ITEM TO EACH SPA C E 2 tt P S Nomi h a i l w T h ^ V on- F iW M Im I n r r LLJ-t/ B Y y Q UA N TITY SH IPPED PRICE AMOUNT U N IT - M M f H M li wm TM M This is a copy of your order exactly aa we hare entered it. If incorrect in any way, please notify us (District Office Shown above) at once referring to our order number. The goods told hereunder ere w arranted to be tree from defect of m a te ria l an d w orkm anship, b u t *** express w a rra n ty la In lieu of and excludes all other w arranties. Defective goods may be re tu rn ed to Seller after Inspection by, and upon receipt of definite instructions from, Seller. Goods so returned and found to be de fective will be replaced or repaired w ithout charge, but Seller shall not be liable for loss or dam age directly or Indirectly arising from the use of the goods or from any other cause. Seller's liability be ing expressly lim ited to the replacem ent or repair of defective goods. Every on account o t defective goods, short count, or for any o th er cause, shall be deem ed waived by Purchaser, unless m ade in w ritin g w ith in th irty (30) d a y s from th e receipt of goods to w hich such claim relates. An overrun or underrun of 9% of th e quantities specified shall be considered fulfilment of this order. D elay o r fa ilu re to perform an y co n tra c t In accordance w ith It* term s shall be excused by (a) sabotage, fire, flood, differences with workmen, riot. Insurrection, w ar, act of any Governmental authority, priorities granted at the request or for the benefit, directly or In directly, of any governm ent or agency thereof, shortage of raw m aterial. Inability to m eet cu rrent sales requirem ents, act of God, or (b) any causes beyond the control of Seller. Any of the fore going conditions resulting In delay or failure to perform any con tracts shall excuse such delay or failure w hether the condition exists now or arises hereafter, in case of such delay or failure to perform for any of the above causes, either party may cancel the contract upon notice in w riting given to th e other. (The foregoing super sedes anything inconsistent therew ith relating to the same subject m atter.) There are no w arranties, agreem ents, or understandings express or Implied In respect to the goods covered by this order, except those set forth herein, unless covered in writing and accepted by both Purchaser and Seller. Pu rch aser agrees to pay to Seller th e am ount which Seller is re quired to pay on account of any excise, m anufacturer's, payroll, use, o r sales taxes o r charges w hich m ay b e established or levied by any G overnm ental authority (domestic o r foreign) upon the m erchandise sold hereunder, o r any p art thereof, or the manufac ture, use, sale, or delivery thereof, or upon the m aterials entering Into the m anufacture thereof, insofar as the same may be ap plicable to th e m erchandise sold hereunder or the manufacture, use, sale, or delivery thereof. This order is subject to the approval of Seller's Sales and Credit D epartm ent at Lancaster, Pa. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS DO N O T W R IT E IN T H IS SPA C E PLANT FILE NO. F o rm 332 7-52 1053 F. I . C. S ta n d a r d C om pensation Order C a p tio n P a g e-- Form 1 FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION DIVISION TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA CLAIM NO: S-85603 DATE OF ACCIDENT 195 EMPLOYEE: FLOYD HYATT c/o Lucilio Snowden SQ5-SI0 SeybeId Building Miami 32, Florida EMPLOYER: Represented by: LUCILLE SNOWDEN Attorney at Lnvr 8-51C Soybold Building Miami 32, Florida ARMSTRONG CORK COMPANY Lancaster, Pennsylvania CARRIER: STANDARD ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY 32C Miracle Mile Cora;. Gabion, Florida Represented by: DIXON, DeJAEHBTTE h BRADFORD Attorneys at U * F ira t National Bank Building Kauai 52, Florida Compensation Order Deputy Commiesionor George C. KcCaugban ISSI Seyoold Building Miami, florid.; S-6S302 Floyd Hyatt . Armstrong Cork Co After duo notice to the partiaa, a hearing on the above entitled claim was conducted by the undersigned Deputy Commissioner at Hiaai* In Dado County, Florida on J-.auary 5, 1954. Upon consideration of the evidence presented in respect of such claia, the undersigned Deputy Ccaalssloner finds thati 1. The Florida Industrial Commission hat jurisdiction of the parties and the subject natter. 2, The claimant yam employed by the Armstrong Cork Company during the years 1944 and 1949 at the McCloskey Ship Tsrd, In Tampa* Florida* as a building mechanic engaged in the erection of Insulating material, which occupation required the claimant to work in a confined space with blocks of asbestos material and to be constantly exposed to asbestos dust, which was so dense as to fog his glasses and penetrate his ears, nose, mouth and eyas. In the course of this work* the claimant Inhaled considerable quanti ties of the asbestos dust, {hiring the last thirteen weeks of his employment by the employer* the claimant* average weekly earnings were $63.52, making his rate of compensation $22 per week. ji At the first hearing, the carrier controverted the claim 1 on the ground that the statute of limitations had run against the | 4 4 '! claim and that the employer had not hadnotice vithinthetime re- ji quired by statute. j Testimony revealed that the claimant began to be short of breath in 2943 and to thereafter have s slight cough, but did not ji !i seek medical attention until he went to Dr. Brunner for treatment !| . _ i in November of 1952, who diagnosed the ailment as being silicosis. This examination was occasioned by a chance x-ray taken by a Com- || ij manity Cheat Mobile X-ray Unit during a tuberculosis prevention drive. On August 31. 1S53, the claimant went to Dr. Isaac B. I; Cipyes, who, after anextensive examination,diagnosed the 1 claimant *a complaint as being asbestos is directly attributable to I, jli F L O R ID A IN D U S T R IA L C O M M IS SIO N i W o rk m e n '* C om p e n satio n D iv isio n j T& ilahastee, F lo rid a | the employment with the employer. This w a s the first time that claimant had any inkling that he waa suffering fro* asbeatosis. Thereafter, oa September 1, claim was filed on behalf of claimant for compensation oa the basie of asbeatoais as an occupational disease, and, oa September 9, 1353, a notice waa ailed to the em ployer, which was acknowledged by letter of September 11, 1953, frcm the employer. Dr. Cippes testified before the Deputy Commissioner that the claimant was permanently totally disabled and would continue to be so for the rest of his life. Claimant testified that he was unable to be out of bed for more than a eery short period of time and was unable to do any fora of labor. Be described in detail the conditions in which he worked with the employer, and the description of the conditions were those as described as likely to cause the disease by Dr. Cippes. The insurance carrier* only testimony was in the nature of the report of Dr. M. Jay Flipse, who found the claimant to be i suffering fro* pulmonary emphysema and bilateral pulmonary fibrosis. The Deputy Commissioner finds that the claimant does j suffer from asbestosis, as testified to by Dr. Cippes, and as a direct result ofhis employment by the Armstrong Cork Company, and that the same falls within the provisions of Chapter 440.15-1 as an ! occupational disease. The Deputy Commissioner interprets the requirement for jj notice to the employer claimant becomes aware to of be notice within 90 days the nature of the injury of or the time the occupational jji disease, and the Deputy Commissioner finds that notice was given I! 1 within the time required. The Deputy Commissioner further finds that the rate of jI compensation is that which aas in effect at the time of the ex- || posure of the claimant to asbestos dust in 1945, to-wit, $22 per ;j I! week. |! ji 9HHFCSt, it is the order of the undersigned Deputy | i >2* F L O R ID A IN D U S T R IA L C O M M IS SIO N W o rk m e n ' C o m p e m a tlo n D iv is io n TaHaha*soe, Florid a Commissioner that the employer, Armstrong Cork Ccrnpany, by it insurenee carrier, Standard Accident Insurance Company, do: 1. Pay claimant, Floyd Hyatt, permanent total disability compensation from August Id, 1352, at the rat of $22 per weak. 2, Furnish claimant such medical benefits a the asture of bin condition due to the occupational dicease require, $, Pay th charges of Dr. S. C. Brunner and Dr. Isaac 3. Cippes, for examination and medical treatment, within the limit prescribed by the ltedical Fee Schedule, and reimburse claimant for such payment as he may have made toward the charges made by these physicians. 4. Keimburse claimant to the extent of $38.25 for d and medicines purchased by him at the direction of Dr. L C. Brunner In the treatment of the occupational disease. S* Pay to Lucille Snowden the sum of $300, as a reason j able fee for the serriee* performed on behalf of claimant herein, DORS AMD OU3LE2D at Miami, Florida, this JA day of January, 1054. ^ s ( a SA L ) Florida Industrial Commission " 1 CC: Parties Attorneys Florida Compensation Siting Bureau This is to certify that a copy hereof has been sent byj registered mail to the claimaht and to the employer at the last known address of each, this -1 ??,day of 19^ FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION 3 W o r k m e n '# C o m p e n s a t io n D i v is io n Tallahassee, F lo rid a D M F E R R Y J R . Chairman of the Board R. H P L A T T S , President F S B R O W N . Vice Pres & Secretary L. K K I R K , Vice Pres 4 Trea sur er J P H A C K ER . Vice President P A U L W I L S O N . Vice Pr esident E A W A R N I C A . V.ce P res ide nt P E LAYMON. V.ce Pr esident and Cenerei Counsel H A W H I T E . Vice President Standard A ccid en t In su ran ce Com pany INCORPORATED ISSA CASUALTY I NSURANCE FIDELITY AND S URETY B O N D S fUEL J . CARR R ESID EN T V IC E -PR E SID E N T P hiladelphia B ranch O ffice STANDARD ACCIDENT BUILDING 214 SOUTH FIFTH ST. Philadelphia 6, Penna. PHONE LO 3-8518 Armstrong Cork Company Lancaster, Penna. December 2l, I9 53 Att: R. C. Schiedt, Jr. Tax Department Re: File #1*88988 - Armstrong Cork Floyd Hyatt Dear Sir: Thank you very much for your prompt answer to our letter of October 26th, I9 5 3 , requesting wage information on the dove claimant. The writer has been endeavoring to get a specimen of the type covering used on the job which you did at the McCroskey Shipyard in 19 V*- and I9L5 , but to date I have been unsuccessful. I called at the manufacturer of this asbestos pipe covering, the jfeasby & Madison Company, in Ambler, Penna. and explained the situation, but they felt that they could not give the material directly to me, but ather requested that I have someone from the Armstrong Cork Company go through the process, and if the material was available , they would supply the same. We desire to get a specimen of this material in order that we may have it analyzed <asaiA t this time I request that if you do not have some of the material on hand 'at your plant, would you kindly write to JJeastyMadison Company and try and secure some of the same? Thank you very much for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, H. Johnson Claim Repr. BJ:dd P la n e ! Insurance Company, Detroit Standard Accident Insurance Company, Detroit Pilot Insurance Company, Toronto FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION The Deputy Commissioner w!ll hold I conference between all partes in Lomm ss'on Cfficis on ta a- i #*<*** and to try the issues. _______________ November 3,--- , 19-- --------------- 1051 Seybold Baildlng --------------- Miami, Florida------- Office of the Deputy Commissioner Notice of Hearing Claim No S- 35602- ------------------- ---- - -- -- ----------------------------------------------------Employee --F lo y d H y a tt, in c a r c - c f -h i s a t t o r ney----------------------------------------- Attorney for Employee -- L u o l l l e Snevdc a , S ey b o ld B u ild in g , Miami-, F l o r i da Employer------Armst r o n g Cork Company,- Lcme&ete r--Pe n n s y lv a n ia -------------------- Insurer --Standard Accident Insurance-Co., c/o Dixun, DeJarnette Attorneys-- Attorney for Employer or Insurer Dixon, DcJarnette- Bradford, First fetiuim3r-Sank-3uHlng Miami, Florida TO THE PARTIES ADDRESSED: A hearing will be held in the above case at - 10 5 1 Sre y b o ld 3 u m i n g , ~Hiam r, T r dr-ia a ___________ _________________________ By agreem ent o f p a r tie s --------------------- a t-------- 9*3-------- o'clock --------M--------December 2 2 , 1 9 5 ? ;------------------------------------------------------------- THIS HEARING IS PART OF A SCHEDULE; IT CANNOT BE POSTPONED WITHOUT CONSIDERABLE INCONVENIENCE AND EXTRA EXPENSE. POSTPONEMENT CANNOT BE HAD EXCEPT UPON STRICTLY LEGAL GROUNDS: SU B JE C T O T 'H E A R IN G (H ere state question in dispute) ; 0 DETERMI NE T HE MERITS OF THE CLAIM FOR COM PENSATIONBENEFITS FCR D I S A B IL IT Y RESULTING FROM A S B 2 S T 0 S IS CONTRACTED DURING- 1 9 4 4 AND ,1 9 4 5 WHILE EMPLOYED' AT 74cCLLKEX SH IP Y A R D S , TA M PA ,'FLO R ID A - . 1 v 'xC\ ______________ ________ '.V ;'^j The artieS'io this hearing should arrange to have all witnesses present to testify promptly at the time and place above givenr, (Subpoenas^ will be issued upon request of parties or counsel.) The right is 'feservedNfo take such action as the law permits if either party fails to appear at the time and place set for this hearing..-,, \ v ' -- FLORI DA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION CCi Above Parties, Tallahassee Office Reg. to Carrier's Attorney ** & ~ 'r ' ) - Deputy Commissioner HOSE----4 0 1 4 ---- - 03 GEORGE C. McCADGHAN \* v W c i - l ~ . 4 v - -.T *". '* * f-rr-nrs AS October 30, 1953 <- t/bl < ^ , v.'\v , 7 ? ''VO V.i.0 Standard Accident Insurance Co, 2U South Fifth St, ****L Philadelphia 6, Panna, -. >- 12/30 : *tyl Geatleweni **/ Attention! Mr, H, Johneon x Vr.,0 0 ' t b/n Pile *88988 <U 6 .C0 73i55 We acknowledge the reoeipt of pour letter of October 26 concerning the alleged occupational disease suffered bF Floyd I f y a t t , ' _ ' ,, 5 ft. *b* Payroll detail prior to 1945 has bean destroyed, however, our records. Indicate the following wage were paid in the periods indicated. Fourth quarter of 1942 ^ ~Lbl*..c ployed, in Michigan a $1^ , 6 ^ * ^ covsx.* s 'iW Ilrat quarter.1944 Uiit h^S* --S-ec.on.d ** w /riirari' in* bi l'-' v, -.r' Fourth Employment occurred in Florida '#715,56\?fr 996.75 1"^ 834.00 453.75 C---- **" * a G-anTJ 1945 eaploynent detail in Florida followsi Week Saded 1/23/45 V ? 1/30 v - b 2^6 Vl3 ^ ^20 - 2/?rt : 3/6 r - ; 3/13 3/20 3/27 4/3 4/io 4/17 4/24 5A 5/8 5/15 ^ 5/22 Total Hours Total Wages 16 & . -fc S d l # 40 TJOt-iJ^ay?^ -Q QQ 32 48^00 16 24.00 48 78.00 48 78.00 48 : 78.00 48 78.00 48 78.00 40 60.00 48 ^ 78.00 48 78.00 48 78.00 48 78,00 40 84.00 56 . -40 78.00 66.00 48 78.00 i Standard Accident Inaurane Co* - 2 - October JO , 1953 Veek Ended Total Hours Total Vage 5/29/45 48 I 78.00 ;u7 6/5 48 78.00 / 1 2 48 78.00 48 78.00 ;.6/25^:: ! 93.00 7/? _/*.*- I 4S 8 81.75 12.00, 7/16 7/23 7/30 . wl3 - CT? ,,Wtvlij'. 48 *'7 48 v--40 th :****ir- 48 Jo iiz Rotear Total:yd S; 78.00- 78.00 66.00 7 fift St20S8;73 ^ratt* a original "Wpicyneat' started soaetiae in the f o u r t h ^ quarter of 1942 and teralhatsd due to "no work" August 11, 1945Ucatsc:, Due to the"tight*labor aaxket during the war, it is quite possible Hyatt was enployed as a pipe coverer. *SincVou didaot enclose a wage stataewmt in your letter, do not hesitate to contact us if we failed to give you all the infoxmtion ordinarily appearing on the wage statement. .5*^3* * * *\ * r- Sr-** BCSJr ilWH *f.-%.l*v *V '* I * - */ -*.vs -i . <* # *- n V. IV . V' *u - : vaI^ truly youra^ " i `ivrs5.il in T- r ARMSTIOHQ CORK COMPASX flt i ^ w ***--->-?-- -Mvni y is R. C. Schiedt,' JratO K-, Tax Department;- t. 'a< i* v T * v. 4 v-/. . `i.y^t-vV< **. . y-^ V* *.*v't Vj-v^aV*- f *>>i-r*-\St +T t* r. /,,v1- Oft /,c 'rti J )l<Z 1 -L % * I I Z 1- U-- `C2eXi-ct I s T .^- ^fcTK. V kft. ' iv* iR,-k*\ ' l \ y ir> PCTUo nr.ro J 1 u.if % 'ty-.e o +5^1? ! <WdU 0+*+ < V&.0 & 2 OZ.'S. 3 4 ^ . . 7r /X-^rU-A. D M F E R R Y. J R . Chairman of the Boaro R H PLATTS, President F S B R O W N , Vice Pres 5 Secretary L K Kl R K , Vice Pres & Tre asurer J P H ACK ER, V.c* President P A U L W I L S O N . Vice P r e s e n t E A W A R N I C A . Vice Pre side nt P E LAYMON. Vice P r e ,, d e n t and General Counsel H A W H I T E , Vice President Y 2 Jr Standard A ccid e n t In su ran ce Com pany INCOA POAATC D 1864 " " CASUALTY I NSURANCE * FIDELITY AND S URETY B O N D S SAM UEL J. CARR r e s id e n t V ic e - p r e s id e n t P hiladelphia B ranch O ffice STA N D A R D A CCID EN T BU ILD IN G 214 SOUTH FIFTH ST. Philadelphia 6, Penna. P H O N E L O 3-8519 Armstrong Cork Company October 26, 1953 Lancaster, Penna. Att; Payroll Section Re: Pile #1468988 - Armstrong Cork Co. Floyd Hyatt - Acc: ? Gentlemen: During the years I9M 1 and I9L5 , this company was the Workmen's Compensation Carrier for Armstrong Cork Company. We have been advised by our Tampa, Florida Office that daring this time you had one Floyd Hyatt in your employ as a plasterer. It is alleged that during, that time Mr. Hyatt was working at the McCloskey Shipyard in Tampa as a plasterer R-nfl due to the shortage of employees was used to wrap pipes with asbestos. Recently his attorney made claim to the Workmens Compensation Division for total disability as a result of contracting asbestosis during this period of working in your employ. We are enclosing a wage statement and request that you complete same. Also, it is requested that you advise us, if possible, when Mr. Hyatt came tqfrork for your company, when he left your employ, his reasons for leaving, and if possible, any period of time in which while your employee, he would have come in contact with this asbestos material. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation, I remain, Very truly yours, Planet Insurance Company, Detroit Standard Accident Insurance Company, Detroit Pilot Insurance Company, Toronto Inter Office Communication Armstrong Cork Company c , ; 1 ir Enclosed-you will find correspondence relating - - ' . . -i, . -y--11- - -t- " ---- -- '' to a compensation claim ,,made '*?'**&t-:-' --1***-' '^y>j vV'''yy-'*'' TV. SSf^ W "*h*avVw'"*n*ow '*"r_e_co_rd wo*f we.vwe.r havv:ing employed Mr;*^ Hyatt' at the Pensacola Plant. ' It is possible that He^wor'ked^- during 191j!j.-li.$.'as/..an employee in contract operations Tthe Building Materials' Division. We are therefore';fs e n d i ^ D M F E R R Y J R ., Chairman of (he Board R H PLATTS, President F S B R O W N . Vic* Pres & Secretary L K K I R K , Vice Pres. & T r e as u r e r J P HAC K ER . Vic* President P A U L W I L S O N , Vice P r e s s e n t E . A. W A R N I C A . Vice P res ide nt P E LAYMON. V.c* President and Cenerai Counsel H A WH IT E. Vice President Standard A ccid en t In su ran ce Com pany I N C O R P O R A T E D 189 CASUALTY I NSURANCE - FIDELITY AND S UR E T Y B O N D S Claim Department F R A N K V . C O F F E E . CLA IM REPR ESEN TA TIV E 4TH F L O O R B A R N E T T N A T 'L B A N K S L O G . JACKSONVILLE 1. FLA. September 17 1953 Y-L. P. Shriver Agency, 1801 Union Bank Bldg., Pittsburgh 22, Feana. Attention Hr. D. 2. Edgar REt Floyd Hyatt ts Armstrong Cork Co., d/a 1944 and 19 4 5 Gentlemen! We acknowledge your letter of September 16, 1953 enclosing papers in connection with the above. These papers are being forwarded today to our ;* Miami, Sla* Claim Office, Mr. Jade Walker, Claim Representative, Standard Accident Insurance Company, 320 Miracle Mile Road, Coral Gables, Florida, where the matter vill receive-prompt attention. Tours very truly, Z N\cc-Hr. R. C. Schiedt, Jr., Armstrong Cork Co., Lancaster, Ponna. cc- Standard Accident Ins. Co., 320 Miracle Kile Road, Coral Gables, Fla. Attention Mr. Jack Walker, Claim Rep. Planet Insurance Company. Detroit Standard Accident Insurance Company, Oetroit Pilot Insurance Company, Toronto V-L. P. SHRIVER AGENCY, General Agent 1801 UNION BANK BLDG. PITTSBURGH 22, PENNSYLVANIA Phon* Grant 1-7800 September 16, 1953 Mr. R. C. Schiedt, Jr. Tax Department Armstrong Cork CompanyLancaster, Penna. Dear Mr. Schiedt: Re: Claim No. S-5602 - Floyd Hyatt vs Armstrong Cork Co. Date of Accident 1944 and 1945_______________________ This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 15th, with enclosures, in connection with the above. As per copy of letter attached, we have forwarded all papers to the Jacksonville, Florida Office of the Standard Accident Insurance Company for the necessary attention. Should additional information be required, you will hear further from either the Standard Accident Insurance Company or this office. We shall keep you advised as to developments. Very truly yours, V-L. P. SHRIVER AGENCY D. B. Edgar DBE:maw cc: Frank V. Coffee, Claim Rep. Standard Accident Ins. Co. 401-402 Barnett Nat'l. Bank Bldg. P. 0. Box 359 Jacksonville 1, Florida FllZA September 16, 1953 Frank F. Coffee, Claim Representative Standard Accident Insurance Company 401-402 Barnett Nat'1. Bank Building P. 0* Box 359 Jacksonville 1, Florida Dear Hr, Coffee Re Floyd Hyatt vs Armstrong Cork Co,. D/A 1944 & 1945_________ We are attaching copy of the following letters: Florida Industrial Commission to Miss Lucille Snowden, Atty. at Law, dated September 9th, 1953* Armstrong Cork Co. to Florida Deputy Commissioner, dated September 15th, 1953* Armstrong Cork Co. to V-L. P. Shriver Agency, dated Septem ber 15th, 1953* From the correspondence you will note that Miss Snowden is filing claim against our assured, Armstrong Cork C6., on behalf of Floyd Hyatt for disability resulting from asbestosis, which is alleged to have been contracted during 1944 and 1945 in the course of the claimant's employment. The letter from the Armstrong Cork Co. to us dated September 15th sets forth the employment record of the claimant. We are also enclosing coverage information for our assured's policies for the 1944 and 1945 years. The Standard Accident Insurance Company covered all operations in the State of Florida, except their manufacturing plant at Pensacola. Would you kindly do the necessary to protect the ( //interests of this good assured. If further information is A. <desired, do not hesitate to call upon us. ' - Thanking you, we are :c:t to <D<,e tr .' /> Very truly yours, V-L. P. SHRIVER AGENCY Jr- D.'B. Edgar : cX I 'J A- c- C-V** St a t e o f Flo r id a OAN MCCARTY. G o v e r n o r O ffic e o f Deputy Commissioner 1051 Seybold B u ildin g Miami 32, F lo r id a September 1 1 , 1953 -7 \ --' 1 , / H. E. W O L F E INDUSTRY MEMBER L. R. W E ST O N LABO MEMBER y RODNEY DURRANCE DIRECTOR Arm strong Cork Company F. 0. Box 351 Pensacola, F lo rid a A tte n tio n : Mr. J . H. A pp leyard, P ersonnel Manager Re: S -85602 F lo y d H yatt v . Arm strong Cork Company G entlem en: The above m atter has been r e fe r r e d to t h i s o f f i c e f o r a t t e n t io n , claim f o r b e n e f it s under th e Workmen's Compensation A c t having been f i l e d by the employee, through h is atto rn ey , Miss L u c ille Snowden. Copy o f th e claim i s e n clo se d . In acco rd an ce w ith l e t t e r o f September 9 , 1953> from Mr. Rodney D urrance, D ir e c to r , to Miss Snowden, k in d ly ad vise a t your v e ry e a r lie s t convenience whether i t is agreeable w ith you fo r the h e a rin g t o be h e ld in Miami o r w hether you p r e fe r th a t i t be h e ld in Tampa. You h a v e, no d o u bt, r e c e iv e d a copy o f Mr. D u rra n ce 's le tte r by th is tim e. Thanking you f o r your prompt a t t e n t io n to t h i s m a tte r, I am E n el. CC: M iss L u c i l l e Snowden A tto r n e y a t Law Seybold B u ild in g Miami 32, F lo r id a c 0 p ' Y LUCILLE SNOWDEN A tto r n e y a t Law Miami 32, F lo r id a September 1 , 1953 F lo r id a I n d u s t r ia l Commission Workmen's Compensation D iv is io n T allahassee, Florida Re: F loyd H yatt vs Armstrong Cork Co. Date o f D is a b ility , August 12 , 1953* Dear S ir s : Floyd H yatt f i l e s claim a g ain st the Armstrong Cork Co. fo r d i s a b i l i t y r e s u lt in g from a s b e s to s is w hich was co n ta cte d d u rin g 1 9 ^ and 19^5 w ith th e above named em ployer, w h ile claim an t worked a t the M cCloskey Sh ip Yards a t Tampa, F lo r id a . S in ce we do not know th e name o f t h i s em ployers'- c a r r i e r , nor do we know t h i s e m p lo y ers' a d d r e s s , we w ish t h i s l e t t e r to c o n s titu te n o tice o f d is a b ili t y from any earnings as o f A ugust 1 2 , 1953> and c la im a n t 's knowledge o f h is c o n d itio n as o f the la s t week o f August, 1953* I t i s re q u e s te d th a t h e a rin g be s e t on t h i s case p r e fe r a b ly in Miami, i f the c a r r ie r w i l l a g re e , as th e d octors and claim ant liv e in th is area. Claim ant has req u ested th a t I re p re s e n t him in t h is c a s e . Sin cerely, N L u c i l l e Snowden A tto r n e y a t Law September 15* 1953 Mr. George C. lfrCau#ian firaotar fti-- < w m w * 1051 Seybold Building XUad 32# Florid* Bear Mr* HrCaogfriMt Ve aekaovledge the receipt of * copy of * letter written By Kr* Rodney Barranca to HLm Xneille Soow&an regarding the alleged disability of Jloyi Hyatt* Our records Indicate Mr* Hyatt wee in our ecploy as a building Mechanic engaged in the erection of Insulating Materials* Ve dll not eelf-ineure this type of work but had worknen's craapenea tioa coverage with the Standard Accident Insurance Company* A copy of Mr* Purraace** letter has been forwarded to the agent who handled the Standard Accident account at that tia* Very truly yours* AR26ZSC6S COKE COMPAST RCSjAI ' Copies tot Mr. D. B. Edgar Y-L. p. Shriver Agency Pittsburg 22* pa. Mr* J. H. Appleyetrd* Pensacola Plant B* 0 Bchledt* JT* Tax Bopartaont Sopteafeor 15, 1953 Kr. D. B. Edgar VL* P. Shrlver Agency 1801 Union Baak Blds Pittsburgh 22, Pa. Bear Dar) , V aro eaeloolag a copy of a lottar fro tba florida Zn&oetrial Co-"'J alaaioa regar&lag a orfcaea'a coapenaation elaia filed by Flayi Hyatt Rocord indicata thia aaa va anpleyed by <mr Detroit Diatrict orfico in 19**2 and our Jhckaoarille, Florida, Offico in 1 9 ^ and 19^5 aa a >y< narTimrl n i Our payroll record prior to 19^5 ha-vo tota deatroyed Bovever, 19^5 rocorda indicate Kr. Hyatt aa ejqployed la Florida fron Jtouary 82, 19^5, to Ansaat 11, 19^5# aa a plaaterer at $1.5 0 per honr , Zn n o m a i t i m e 0 txao plaatarora to ortet corkboard* Burins World .War XX, &uo to tho aaapover hortago, o rdgbt har ueed thia m n tb apply pipo covering Xeaabey & Jfettiaoa, asxnifaeturor of thia hast lniralatloa aato* rial, hart told na esployeoa hava beea aanufacturlng thia prodoot ihr yeare vithout aay ili ffoeta. Thi appeara to ho a pretty veak elaia Wo aaeum Standard vili reply to tho l&at ateneo in Kr Burrasca* letter dated Bepteober 9, 1953* & you re^ulro additional iaforaatiea, let na FCStAS Saeloanr Very truly youra, 8 C Schiedt, Jr. Ta* Departaaat FLO RID A IN DU STRIAL COMMISSION W O R K M E N 'S C O M P E N S A T I O N DIVISION TALLAHASSEE September 9 , 1953 Miss Lucille novden Attorney at Lav 808-IO Seybold Building Miami 32, Florida Re: Claim Ko* S-8 5 6 0 2, Floyd Hyatt vs. Armstrong Cork Company, d /a 19^4 & 19^5 Dear Miss Snowden: We have your letter of September 1 filing claim against Armstrong Cork Coopany on Behalf of Floyd Hyatt for disability resulting from asbestosis, which you state was contracted during 19 Mt and 19 ^ 5 in the .course of the claimant1 employment. You request that the case be set down for hearing in Miami if the engjloyer will agree, as the claimant and the doctors live in that area. It appears that this matter has not previously been reported to this office} therefore, we have established a file by assigning our number S-8 5 6 0 2 to your letter, which we are today forwarding to Deputy Com missioner George C. tfcCaughan, Miami, with the understanding that the hearing will be held there unless the Armstrong Cork Company objects to this arrangement. A copy of this letter is being forwarded to the Armstrong Cork Company, self-insurers, and they are requested to ad vise Mr. McCaughan if they prefer that the bearing be held at Tampa where the Injury occurred or whether it is agreeable for him to con duct the hearing. Very truly yours, i'S-t ;1 ^ . v/ R0D5EY DURRAHCE Director / / JCC:lfc v cc: Mr. George C . McCaughan Deputy Con&tdssloner 1051 Seybold Building Miami 32, Fla. (End. - file) cc: Mr. J. H. Appleyard, Personnel Mgr. Armstrong Cork Company P. 0. Box 351 Pensacola, Florida - c. ft uUi^i idilli COPY H y a t t , ployd.................................. S 8 5 6 0 2 1 * ^ xa- -__________________ v1 A r m s tr o n g j*1o r k o .________________________ TS______ 2 ______________________________________________________________________________ _ Acc!d>nt Injury n o n t a c t f f d d u r i n g 1 Q44 ft >45^ '* .. ?_______ A S b e S t O S l S ___________________________________________________ Remarks l e t t e r ~bd__________________________________________ The Commission has assigned the above Case Number to this file. All future reports and correspondence concerning this injury MUST refer to this number. Florida Industrial Commission. Workmen's Compensation Division ) r. l*. e U rt ^ `rS- ^ 5 -J i- .c c s '1 ^ 7 S * j y 7 - f r 8 ^a ---c'& Ji Inter Office Communication Armstrong Cork Company ..-.i*.. .... ,-~v v . ............................................................. ........ ............ : S . * -- ; '.'',,y . ,, ' . J - " - T o : Mr.'D. M . Wegman, Insurance Department, Lancaster . 9 / 1 1 / 5 3 From J / H; "Appleyard, ? e n s a c o l a ; ^ - ^ ^ J f T t r;:_ o h Subject , ^ - r ~ ' :.:;:^/r -. W ; f ` ./--t;; ; > r - v ' J i , ; . / . . , V , v ; 3 - 5 ^ 7 i -, -/ z. ^ *** , , -- - --, ' p "f' " ^ .* * _*i ^ * t . _ *, - * .. *'/" * * ~ \ * "fr'** *.- 1_kr`a^ j.. 't ' . - ^j '"7* '-/- 'i5 ".'v' v*^ - ' .;. - , _'/. --*' . %' - ~; x, ' J >\ 1'* *''' 17-'j-^ ^ rJZ*'* * *- ' **( '*f s ^/ -'' - *' **".'<' r_ ^ This morning, we received the .enclosed letter, from^;.^':..;'^'k`.-Av; the Florida Industrial Commission Workmen's Compensation Director indicating a claim against.Armstrong Cork Coiiany.:,^^ on hehalf of a Floyd Hyatt, claiming disability .resulting i 'from asbestos is contracted during employment during ^?'^r4.\ Wel'have' examined the,"records of/oihi'plsntjsnid^'ltayefriouii "on^'any5such individual*! /lioweVei^.nTthLe^cqurse^ 'letter*- Mr..lPurrahceTrefefrCto"l > ^ which lads^ us' to'bielive ;that this `mahHm y ^ a v e * r'heeh nloyed'>y''thet^ntract' division;' of'four anyi ^ W e l f v cot Mr. E. H.; Lee A;-'. zm. :v^.%vi v-;-t " .' .'l' 'a , ,, , ', . . r ' . '- ` ; : ` ' - ' - * 1* * ., > r . 7 ". .-J," ' : , . . , : . , - , ., `'-J. h 'C,' ' t . *#' ^ v/:iv';:K.',V.\z:X:W -:y*Tv:''^7.v -;k "-- -V ' *r"-i -' -V ' -' - Form 1501 1100 .4 6 :i-";;.-.u.'l.--.^r-*- i-'-' ' -j. -' i-.--i.~- , - - . v ' ; -ri' .-; *= .?>../ ' i - . vc' s r j-' = - - va. j . , .. ,