https://haylibrary.cvlcollections.org/files/original/a70e0f079919ff8d93047a915ec3e4f7.pdf 5493db7c3456978ef2a7acde6a1f2589 PDF Text Text Odober16 , 1930 u:? -~ho :~!:a ?~,,-ich G'"' '!Q : \?i)~..ell is i:1 L:..Oco;,:•d8.Y.lCO ,:~:1:~h t:n1:~t~; es·~iOFtG -----=-uo.r.1o l)J ;'_.·. '?L:.l:l __f Z'f'O . ';'~10 c.:.E~Ot'il"G l}.0,;'00f], U00i'1 C,9 ohot,i;'! C0!.11 0 '.!?flf:'l C?-i~in2,! ~\-rt.~r!: '.'.:Jfiuf C. P~Y ')f / �Ro ck Sp rin gs 9 ~r:y o o 1 Oc t o 1 4s: 19 3[» o r . h r o Ge o o B o F ryde t Here 1T1ith :, copy of l etter j~ece i ved t o day fror:1 Lr o J"o e G:1 li cic h re g a r din1:; pay-.ment of comp cnso. ti on a.c cou.11t of injury of iii k e Pa v i c h :, Re lia nce :> \JyominGo f ollor!s tl~e method of p~'lnent 'I'his of c ompens a- tion p r opo se d b y l.w.' o Ta l i af e r 1"0 11 r.rhich is 1 a cce pt2.ble to h r o Ga li cic h The F ollo·,. - Up Bi 11 referred to h a s 0 b een f or wa r ded to day t o the Cl e r k of the 0 �Joseph Ho Ga licich At t orne.y a t La,,-r Ro ck Sp r in 0 s !I ·.:ry omi n g o October 11 51 19300 r Bro HoJ oER r r ing t on :, Su~ervisor of Comp ensa t i on :, "Union Pa cifi c Co a l Comp::::m y :, Roc k Sp rins s :> ':!yoming De a r lir o Ha i--r i11_,, ton g I rc.ra h erewith e nclo s ing follo vr-up bla nk in the llikc Pa vich c o:mp en s 2. t ion ma t te r :, the s ame n o ;;-: h a v i n es b e e n s i g ne d by l.lr a P2,vicha It i s r:zy- u n d.ers t a.n d in2; t ha. t E2,-rich is to J:·e cei;,re ter.a.p ora:qy tot a l dis ::,b ility compensation c:, t 'Gh e r a te of ~p50o 00 p er month:, until the sum of ~)876 o00 is lJ&icl :, 2, t Vih i ch time a stipula tion f or perillD. nent p a rti a l dis2.b ili ty is to be si 6 ned a n d entered int ol> 2,llowing Pavich ~;13r17 .00 for the loss of 91.8% of the si ght of his left eye o Pav ich has re quested that the voucher be f orvrarded to this off ice vrhen the s a me has been received. Yours very truly, (S~d) J. H. Galicich �IionM 2103 SUBJEOT, THE UNION PACIFIC COAL COMPANY Rock Springs, Wyoming ......................Attorney ..................... October 1, 1930 Mr. George B. Pryde Vice President and General Manager The Union Pacific Coal Company IN REPLY P ~ NO . E REFER TO ry Dear Sir: I am sending you a copy of the letter that I have written to Mr. McAuliffe. •Please understand that I do. not in any way question Mr. McAuliffe's action in accepting Galicich's thought in the matter. Still, I think that I owe myself a duty, and that duty is to make my position plain. Mr. Harrington will say that we have never consented to· deviate in the least by stipulation from the plain expression of the statute. If Mr. Galicich can say that one tenth of the sight of an eye is the equivalent to the loss of an eye, Mr. •Muir can say that one fifteenth is the equivalent to the loss, and Mr. Brown can say that one twentieth is the equivalent to the loss. The result of all of which is that you have an elastic system which will expand or contract, in accordance with how the Court, lawyers and jurors feel about it. TST:H Enclosure �8TMDARD 7•27·5000 FOIUl,l 2103 SUBJECT: THE UNION PACIFIC COAL COMPANY Rock SprinGs, Wyoming. IN REPLY PLEASE RE FER TO OFFICE OF Attorney . ········............................ ········-----................................ October 1st, 1930 NO. l.1.'l.r. Eugene McAuliffe President, Tlle Union Pa cific Co a.l Comp c:.ny (~ 1416 Dodge Street Omaha, rlebra ska Dear GiJ•, I received this morni116 a copy of the l ett".r add1: " 3sea. 'by you to hlr . P:ryde, dated September 30 th, in re the cas e of Mike Pavich. Of course 1 the letter is a comman to l:lr. Pryde to instruct Iir . H~r:cing·co:n to stipulate for the awarv., Et:-. Galicich c:.nd the conir.muity knoning that the ar:ar d ·i •s in the na t 1.1 . re of c. settlement, outside of all legal questions involved . ~ver since the compensation..~ m.mt into effect, this o.ffice has never consented that 11 permanet.'t~cu.sability" should be a matter of a.p :i;io1"'tionmeut . t he sta1ute sp e cirically requires that all awarcis for injuries greater than the schedule fixed for the loss of an eye, a l •::.g, &n a:cm, or a foot, shall be based upon those schedules ., and none other. Ever since 1915, \ihen the -l aw ·\'J ent into effect, and t..rirough fu1 unbroken line of jud.icial decisions, no such inju:cy has ever been c.dr1itted as "partial total disabilityn . .All perl!l&nent injuries have heretofore been -classif ied as nperl)lanent total disabilities" or "permenent partial disabil:Lties 11 • This is not true in many of the other stat ~s, but one must reme1Uber that the \,hole ·s ystem of the Wyoming lav1 is basad upon a different foundation than other . systen;s. And this is the reason that the Vlyoming law pays to the unskilled injured wo:::-kman, who has worked only intermittently, like coal miners, sometimes only t \'Jo days in the vieek, the greatest aviards at the least expense to the employers. Your letter changes fifteen continuous years of construction, a.no. holds that one ,'jho has practically 10% of the sight of an eye, that was injured while in the employ of The Union Pacific Coal Com- pany. is to 'be considered, 'because of disease destroying thG. sight in the other eye, "permanently totally ctisabled". During the last fifteen years, the American Medic~l Associatior~ has been driven from pillar to post upon the same subject. At one time 1 t a.a.opted an expression "industrial blindness'' , Vihich of course did not adapt itself to any tangible theory, e.s 2. r orkman might, ba Ttinciustrially blind 11 in the repairing of Geneva watches, ana no-c "ind.ustr·ially blind" in sawing cord uood. This . enabled Compens r-:tio:1 Commissions not only to play "battledore a.116. shuttl1::cock" wita I �industrial enterprises, but politics with the workmen., their tlamilies, their friends, and their unions. So we find in Colorado, that workmen who retained 20%, and who had lost 80% of t heir vi. c•ion ,ii h~ve been declared by commissions, and courts, to be "industrially blind". The American Medical Association, a t i t s. m,?. eti :ng e t Atlant i c City, in 1925., di s allov:.red blindness if 1% of vision was retained. So that, Pavich does not come within the more moder n r ul e ad.op ted by the Alileric0l"1 t ur geons 1 nor r,i t hin the rule t hat has been in vogue in the courts of Southern Wyoming for the past fifteen y sa:cs. 1 But the a.bov,~ is a sm&ll I:oiri t i n tr1 e ca ~e . Tllo T'yoming sta tut e make s :2.ll a1:: ard s II judicial determination£" bet,,e en the employer, the employee, e.nd the compensation fund. The anoun·~ :~aia to P0.vich may not be s o nn t erial. . The vm.y it is computed is very m~ terial, and in directing Mr. Pryde to carry out at·torney Gc:.li ci cl.1. ' s co:mim t ,::i. t i on, SGts a pr e c edeut , ,.rhich to my mind is untsnabl s, a s i t i s i llogi cal . .An excerpt from the statute reads as follows: nrn.1.er a t here h as been z. ? revious disability, as the loss of on & eya, ,J1~ t l1e sigh t the reof.., one h aud, oue foot, or any othe:r pr evious p ermensnt dis~e.bility, the p,3 rcentage of disa t i lit;,;, for a suos0qu3!!t i n j ury shtJ.l b.e dsts1~u11ned by dec-11ct i n g t herefr,'.)m the Je~cen tc.g $ of the· pr evious disability, as it . ex isted at the time of the s1.f bscquent inju-r~y ~n Time and space will not allow me to discu ss the legal ·construc.tion of thG wo1~ds . "PREVIOUS D!SABIEITY". Ii' :fr. Galicich is satisfied that one 1.n:hose eye has · been affected by cat,_~:c act;, out~.dus oi' any kn.o~m injury, either i!i nile 1n the employ o:f The Union ? a cific Coal Company, or any other industry, comes w·l thiu the t ern nprevious disabilityr1, I 1.ould ce1·tainly neither affirm nor de:ay. In the P.avicili ·case, while in the eciployaent of' The union Pacific Coal Company, the partial loss of the _sight of one eye is the extent of what the sta.·tut·s calls 1Tinjur y in the course of employinent;n. 0 Whether Pavich had lost all v.:;.siou in the iu.jurad ey•'e; any deduction could be made .for the eye destroyed through years and years of disease, is a question that I desir r:3d, in .connection with o·ther mat·t;ers, to take up wlth my superiors in the legal profession. But, uhatever migbt be the construction of the statute in relation to the t •1;0 p:ropositi ons above discussed., the statute itself needs careful analysis and consideration, and I can never accept as being "judicial" the view that Galici.c h takes of it, which view appar ently appeals to you. Reau the excerpt from the statute given above, and then consider Mr. Galicich's aue.1 3 sir:.. Quoting from Mr . Gallcich' s letter: �ttP0:rmanent total disaoility compensation ( total less of sight) Less teraporary total disability coitipG:nsation paid from Dec. 12 1929 to ~r..• ,-y W.c;;. 10· , .,.!..v._,. ,""-::o ~Hooo.oo ' t?;'.;t1 -~ I • vO r-) Less prGvious <lis&bility. being totaJ. loss of .right e:ye 1500. 00 1747.00 Corupens&ti on claimed t noy· to illustrate the fall~cy of the method, consider the follo11ing ~tat~e.:u.e.ut~ Pe1...ma11e11t total clisaoility cor:ipe:nsati on ( ·i ;otal loss of sight) 4000.00 Less temporary total disability coillpG:nsa.ti..on _paicl f.i.·om Dec. 12., 1.9~~9 to !!fay l:Jp 1830 S~247.00 Less i:>rGvious disability, being loss of right foot anei right eye 400'0.00 424'!.00 Compensation.claimed I can see no comiection between the amount paid in temporary total w.sability , ~fiith tila i:ntont of the L ~:g:Lslature, under the- excerpt of the statute., and the fact of the matter is., as the last illus tr::.>. tion •;ril l shm,, they do not r10:r.k 0 1..rt f : t a lJ_ ~ To place a fa.1,.se judicial :proposition, an i1log5.cal :tdea.J 2n over~aked and undei""done :proposition, in a stipul ation, to be ti~cn1gll:~less.iy coufirrue6. by a cou:ct.; Q.nd th·:;1•e 0y t,0 b-sc(Y_:.ie a precedent, seems to w.e a ·wrong policy. Not many days ago, in a sowewhat s.imilar case, I told court and sur~eo.ns tha·l:; tb.G basis of soms i:nju!'y, like the one here :i.n quast:i;.on., must be lilcicle ill accordance vrl:ch the statute uuon the schedules for npsrmaneut partla1 disabili t:;tt. Illy O\;ll p:t:•lvid;e ttJ.ought is (not to conflict vith }7o~r 1 s) t:i.'"1at v:-·~ might stipulate \:1i ·i;h flavich that b.e had lost 99;,'b of the sight of the eye injured while in the employ oi' the Union Pacific Coal C0.11~J&.11y, and that there would be no deduction made on acc.o unt of "temporary total c.i.lsabili·ty a,:a.rds 0 • Differing 1,'i~-1 thi::: S~preme Cvm"t of t j ~om:tng., ti1e deduction. of' Htem_pora~y total ar,;urds" is to my mind ¼uestionable. But, ::lUch d~o.uc·i ;ion is .aot, involved, if tll~ 1.uatte1.• \';,~re ·;;o u:..=i c.:>:n- sidered fro~ my viev.point. I sneak about a precedent bei11g s-et---eye cases are very numerous;- spx·ains a1•e vel'Y umae.::eous. If the law 1s uh.i.wsically ~pplied �it can be made a g:i:>a.ft., s ~co11d 011ly to the Volstead. Act. The amount of the award in the Pa.vich case is of little moment., an.cl I had figured. it <mt to be even n.ore than the figures submitted by li:'a t¼alicich. I could ilot br:lng myself, ho-:7ever, to a ccep t lli."' . Gc:,licich's theory, though it seems that he claims, at my hands., a prGcedGn G tuerefo1 I:f the!'e eve1~ wa s such a pr eceden t., and. I approv€:ld it., it was unr:i ttingly done. 7 • But; it mrures much ctlfference--c,s I view it--i.f after careful anslysis m,.-5. consic.era tion of the law., I should pass up to the cou:rt a st,ipula.tion, knowing the same to Le illogical, u1T11orlcable, and. not rei'lecting th~ lav1 . Pavich, :l..n purvie-?.' of ;.,he '•.7yomin~ l a ~:, is not totaJ.ly Dliud. P~-vich' s previous disability i.m s not the result of an injur·y, ci..lld to ny llind. the \~yoming statute, when re·f erring to previous disabilities, do~s not include lii11du.stric.J. d:1.seasesn. If -.;; 0 should so co1:-ist:cue the ·;yoming llct, \~,e wc"Uld let doY:n the ba.rs to .;:l l!ilo st e ve"I'y o.:i.sEiase, a situr~tion t hat :Ls troubling compensation commissions,., and the courts in m2ny- st2.tes. ih e Wyomi11g Sta.tute bases no injury upon the sum of money fixed for npermanent total disability 11 , but o~ the contrary especiallY: states that an;f injury kno.rm to surgic~.l science, unprovided for by a specific schedule,. m.ust b e b2sed . upon the ~pecific. schedules ··for ttper:ma11ent partial cii~abilityn~ T:J.l'! Supr emG Court of Wyomi:ng i1us .rmt y .e t s ai r: thc_t "temporsry total· disabil.:t ty a,:a'.i:'ds" • cannot be added to "permanent partial disability a-w::.~.r d sn·. This point the Supreme: · Court o:f Wyoming has so far declined to decide, . but the Supreme Cour·t ·o f Wyo?ning has decided (I thiL.k erroneously) that :ttemporary total £.'.'1 c:rc:sn i:mst be dedu cte~ .frcr.:1 ":9ermanent totcl a1.;ards 11 ~ • In couside1•ation of the above 1 and in view of the fact that Pavich did net receive an iujur·y chile in th G employ of the coal company, destroying more than 91 .. 8% or or,te eye., I am of the opinicn tha.t in law he ir., entitl@d to th~~ 1ercev.tage fixed by the Atla~tic City convention ot surgeol'!.s in 19f5~ the scale used.. ·b y filr. Ha1·ri11gton, and by the oculist who _-exa1r.L:1~d Pavich' s injured. aye, plus such ntempora.1•y total d.1.sabilityn as ~ . .Harrington finds to be just and equi tEi.ble, under the· provisions of the statute. ' ' I deny t:.tat •tl?-e awards for nperlllan.ent pa1~tial disabili tya have any re::l.~veucy. _iil..: logic o:r science, to the_ statute· concerclng r.permanent tot~l clis~bp.i tytr, .__or, to tb.D fact o:f "P~:rmar.1ent total c.is;:1bili t~rn. - • •· T'! 1 p 2<.:.u 4· .c> • . • T .t"• .;:avl.cLJ. .... .:.i.s, e·~ ·c!W .xJ.aiJ{t ;.:, o.!.. ~.i1e u XJ :..C>il .. J..C Cocl Comprn;l, J • I •, , n ,1• ,J 1 "pcrmane.ntly totally disabledn, because of the loss of sight, then the special~~ts . at ;_tlantie City fixed a table, whtch carries t11e loss of .v ision uovm to 99%, still holding thr:i.t the retained vision· of 1i is not total blinw:1es~ _ �ra·· -o f <;:'"', i:: .~-- no ~•a· if ·the reduction of $217 . 00 i s made, would made to $2507.00, giving Po.vich ~~ r15 ~ . OC- ~or e than Gal i clch fig ure s. ·T••1·"' - - -.J t, 1 -!... tl C~-... n ·'L,· ., C Cf t vJ J._ - .J .&.. c• C'"l t:, rl -., 1 '"" ..:..- VUCA..,t,. "-' ;;> --oul·' [!. :t.' '\T•<l> 0 • ' . "- C "-· ..,.,,, C l .L.&. ~» •~ C" \ 1t~ 1 '.~. ' i:" ' - V -• - , <::. 7 Bv. t., h £:Yin:; h ad the 'Jlat t cr up Yiit:c: J·.;.c.g e Ll. c ey, in his o-r;n proper person, and with Mr. Herbert V. Lacey., I doubt at the present ti.11e t ho c:.dvi.s,~bili t y of a l op tir.16 t h 2 .Atl,m tic (;i ty repor t, beci:use there are some matters in the formula upon which that report is based cm t ag on i. s tic to our l m; . Still, t '1e J~tlentic Ci t y fornt.lla is log ical. The formula approved by you, and originating with Mr . Galicich , at leas.t to my :mind, will f i t i10 ct.her cr.se ., c..w.C::. -::1 2.l h 2;v1;; ili.se. strou s e-! 'f a cts, i f aa.op te6... Yours t r uly, TST.:ga CC-Pryd.~-:iarrington. ,,,..---.. �Form 2191' UNION PAC I F I C SYS T .E M () TELIEGRAM T i me Fi led M ./X SYMBOL Px , I/ .\ ·7 Ox i )( Nx '-.._) CLASS OF SERVICE REQUIRED Prefe r red Day ,., / Ni ght I Immediate deliver y 7 ,,,,.. .., .,,-rte li very du ri ng day Delivery by ·next morning ~ ~~ /--J --:;.::::- c .s. 1·29·5 000 M Ind icate by X in propr r line the class of service rei{ui red . D~ n<?t specify preferred serv ice 1f other serv ice w i ll an swer the purpose . ~ 12--2 Gh OH m rAHA 210 PM 3 G B PRID E T s TALLIFEllliO HOOK SPGS 1 DE SI ROUS SETT IB HENT L, • PAVI OUS CA SE A. '\11 MH TA LL I FEfili.0 8 LET~'ER Fi hST Oi.~ SETTLEMENT es.:-::~ L A.DE J\ CCOhD I NG 1:JI TH COUP,~JSATI ON Lfl.\.'J NO OBJECTI ON' TO HI GHER F I GURE r , SUGGESTED WI TH ST A~UE THI NK L/\ ST PAGE lJh T.Cl LL I Fl!:h h O8 L!i;TTER I F SUCH I S I N ACCORD ~; I TH THI S t!lt\N M~ 5l HO\' EV:C.l:l. VJE SHOULD 1: ,AKE JUS'I A ND EARLY SETT LJ:!;l':'i ENT . ,.. -, . .l!;UGENE L, CAUL1 FFQ/ 238?11 �/l At Rock Spring s - September 30, 1930 Hr. Geo. B. Pryd e : !ir . Harringt on 's l etter t o Er. Talia f erro of September 27t h , relative to comp e ns ati on r e que sted by Mr . Hi k e Pavich, loss of ey es i ght: As l'.~. Pavic h has b e en in our employ for a g r eat rnany years \':ith but one us eful eye , I am of t h e op in ion that the almost tot al los s of t he r ema i n i ng ey e \'D.11 not be construed by any court other t han embodying tottl dis ability. I think pro mpt settlement should be made \'d. th IEr. Pavic h on t h e basis of permanent total dise.bility, less the deductions set fort h in t h e letter of Ji.:ttor-.aey J. H. Galicich a ddr essed to r.1r. Taliaferro under date of September 26th, in the amount of f·2, 253. 00. CC - }~. T. S. Talieierro, Jr. Mr. H. J. F.arrington / ,. \ i l - 'J I \. I - i _,, /f{Jlfo--J �L°l;JC1:. (3!_)2:-j_Q~dJ r/:i'y o P o 1:, ~::ft; o ~:;e-; D:_.(.,3 o • -- s . .""· •• lGL.1c:i.~~ -~~ o .,_::_r o 2? nt1.,icll it1 nn 12~:LJGu C'.'"'2 .1 ~:·9 r .rl~ZI;10:i? OC :r:_:y::-)ci:r·i; o~t nilJG::J at vlfi·:..e--'.!1 c~z:..i:.~:t e.11...!...., iu '.., _0 ·_:!.ir·· -r c:.:~ :~"0 c :?2.c~ ----· ey , ::_ . l .. b:;e ": b_~!l.c1 fo:.'l :Et t!1u:1Dc:~ of l.~1_... l -r~::,3_.-'1-,, 'i~ :Qs o:? injv..~J t,o t 0 ~::..e... t, CJ/'3D ·r;e thcZ>iv S?' of oet lch 20· ~i o :n ".J.10 :~sjnz,t:1c1 oyc i:,rr_y o ~1,0 L\JC O~}L 1 ✓,-L!c.i ..,:£:.:~:n "' ".i'l:1.o :..CTielli.O tS:i2.1 via ~1 ef:?::cic.:.i.ny o:? •-:0=·~ ... -J. c.t the t.:.L -· ? n o'.i..::J:.:.l. 'iihl~ n:? ··11Jt..:."y in 01.ll' oiue"°" D::w. 1 ,~: 0 1020, \·:i..,D c;r,:(!i ~) 0 - oei: t :.o a.:t>rivct'l c,'l; so :?o12o·::c:i -, --~ :.,.J L.J .H..Q_L..J._...."'J1:.;..:;1...~=~---""""i..o....v1·;;:..•..."'.'--3· <~ '2he :t:.Jc v.ot?i.2,l vi oc:::.:.1 G?::':::.c·: ency of tJ, o t101,L:.10..L :?ollo· :2.1.2.c.; .t..2pl02'0 1) io 6.lGf.,{ o? wr':.:tc.,1 iu n:;;:::i."'ivoe. u:t in ·i ;ha 1:01:.0,,i:?C.~ :.:.:,.,,.-20_•,., 'I.'3CG,,;~~y r:... c.:.. t:1 ~ i:i.'lj : _~~ cf ~r-0.., • plus ,1 �~7o7•2rr:"' 0 o iJ:1<:1:u.::i t:~:1 c~l 1~· Gi,;.,2 e::'f :t {3 i ency hc:i.r:.v.g b:aen 1 ,..,; • • n • ···, n c;.,< ,r~ ]. 'r,_ .:t o·r:""..,_ , -,n 'l i·,.,.., -•1 v ,..,_ sr;• v/.J V . l'.....~.., ..u •►•" VV V O CJ/:J .!. ~.Z.. •J .,,,. ~ 5.-!L'--'...,.f,} o•-h- o ~"'o c: ' o:? 68 ,. 85;; o~: virrr:_:1 1 0±":f.':l.cio '~{ly d .$ .. o tita :lnJeii•y of DC:lC<;;EibC~ 1 2 Q 1CJ2£l, 21ncl 1.7CP1' e_:t:'!. -cle 1th:.:. 'ii eti oxm_ d ::. _1 ~'.:2! ar:1on1·t o'2'G8i;, "'U~1 o¼' (;½:,000 000 0 . :i:• 02 ,·Hit2:o 00 c.i ~ , j\ .."'Ci'" <•c·1,1 ...U.o:..s-....,.., ·?<·-,,,,,-1 ..., - -l~q J V 1"J QI i.~"'Q Dlici ·•h 0 . :,t .,· oz-·,my fo:~~ :t12j ,1·~ ~ nm}J•fil2.n 0 its c:~:i:.~ra:_z n0 ?o:_:10--, os ' ') y () ~:~ __ ; CCJ:1 t!.y,• Euc;ene t:cAulix':?o r.I:r. Goo. B. Pfyde V enclosine eopic r~~ :- rr w, , GO!":.l., - --- of lotter~ f ro:1 :c:.?,. G2.li ci ch ~'lel Z.::.t" . ';:aliei'c:i..'::."O, .!'()16ti '0 ·;;o wbcrve 0 C.:'108!1 - C Q.J �Josep~ Ho GaliGich At:t ~;y at '[\,fy> J.- : 0 'l' -0 S • 0 \Tl,-, 1 •j "> .Q a L11t1 J•<> .JC ·o~ ~- -..,s, -:-l-::.,: ; - f..1,;-.!,t;;.;_J".;1.,1!) A "G t. D::tn e y a ·i:, .!JS', 'l ~ Ho ck Syn:·i n 7 0, Uyomi n e;o 2?.eplying to you :r8 of yeste:r.~dl.',y 9s de..teD :;:oelc::.i.;i;i,.re to t.he tlikiC'; :.. av i ch c oup e11s2.ti on case O h1 wh:.l ch y·ou 2.sk that r ':r.r.'iTu3 a. lettel'D settinz fo1~ th a detc'..iled s t e.tement of our Cl Q.i:rt !l u ish to s ub:mi t, the follorri nz ::..s l:,eing a faiz\, 0 cr t.;i.i tn ol o 2.nd (i n my opin ion ) leea l m~l'L"lei::'"' of oorn.pu ·i;ing this .,1an ·~t:J coope-nsations Pc :.,- .>r,,il.n e it t ota l .•L·, --i ,... "-•••- di sabili ·cy componsa - f\ :-0-:-,11 1o"""' l.J v C, .:0.0 o-t s·i g h-:-) _ -i, --U L oss tm:upol'"O.:ry ·;; otal clisabilit;y"' cm2pensati on p o.id fi• om J'bco 12:, 192S 0 to llay 1 0 0 1930 z) 247000 Le ss p revious disability, 'bein~ ·total loss of i•ight s)1500o 00 ·1 2 7lJ.:? .oo ~2p253o00 I appreciate the fact that, according to the doctor's report, this man retains 802% of the vision of his lef·i; eye, ~Dut ba.se our claim that Pavich is permanently totally disabled on our Sup:rem.e Court I s hold.i.ng in the Sakamoto vs. Kemm.crer Coal Co. case 11 3G t ~oo 325~ uhich is to the effect; that a workman is entitled ·l;o Permanent total dis~bili ty compensation ~hen it appears that he will never be able to \70rk at any gainful occupa t;i on, e.v en though he has not totally lost those mefilbers for the loss of \~~ioh he io ol:.1lmi11g pe:t"l'.llE!.nent total di s~bil:i. ·Gy o I feel our case comes vl thin the Sakamoto holdi:ng 11 and though this decision · may not be correct in the opinion of solile of the bar, ue are c.ls o d0ducting 0247 .oo by virtue of the same case 0 contrary 0 I believe, to the intention of the Legislature. Yours y·ery truly, (S,~u) J .H. Gal:l. cich t.:OPY �THOMAS SEDDON TJ..LIAPERRO!l JR11 lli::r o Ho J· oHarl'ir.igt Oil Supe~viso~ of Compensation Unim.'! .?n c ii'ic Coal C0Bp2my Ro ck S];:, :i:,ings O ,1yo1:!lil'!e; ;:;- seph Ho Galicich crune to rq office to<il.a.y 0 repres..,. "'nt:i. 2~ 1'..'I:t2ce Pnvich 0 and is c1:1.ssa tis:?iecl ·al th tho proposed settle-1:1cn.·~:i c1c~i- 1- ng t·1c.t the C01ll''{i(;l \"Jill hold -the ,-rnl~.km,311 tot~lly d isn'bled \) rt ses_:1s to E3 that th:i. s is t.vio k:h-1 d of a case tha·t the op elc'.:c-i:nc o:Z'f'ici2.ls should considerl' This f!W..n. had ·only h a lf hi s siQ.;h-t \7hGn i;JG e;-a.pJ.oyed him,., and ·for injuri11g one of' his 0y-:1 s 1o t:L e c onfron·ced. -.·ii th c, claim t;hat he is perEanently t otG.11y di se:bl e d, zw·Grri ·i;hatending that he has a:t:_ost tc:n. pc1.~ ce11t of t he s ie;ht, of one eye o fe aTe told cold blood0dly that the co~rts uill ho1d 0 notr;i thstc.1 1tli • G the statut0 D tha·t the ten-2 per cent of the sight of one e~re l.,eru::,iru.:ng amounts to nothing" 1 '2ne1--.e is much t:i:,.uth in u:ba.t Er. Galicich s~ys~ 'because the Sup1•e1r1e Court of //yomr1g i--aversetl -the ti•i~l cou1•t in 2. decision tho. t I ean never think is logical or scientific!) the case being S&,komoto V'. Kelmle:rer Conl Compu.?Ay 0 36 Vlyoming 3250 I believe that I i:dll s ,ancl this file to the Gener.:,,l At-i::.01·ne;;.ri, ·i:,05ether wi th a copy of this lette::." and a statement of thC3 ±·acts, and let him s~ uhether or no·i; 1-,e are to ste.nd absolutely by the statute, aa the settlement p:roposed stc.nds 1Jy the st~.:tute. TST1H copy � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Union Pacific Collection Description An account of the resource This collection is made possible in part by a generous grant from Wyoming Humanities. All materials are the property of Union Pacific Coal Company, on long-term loan at Western Wyoming Community College. For usage inquiries, contact the <a href="https://www.uprrmuseum.org">Union Pacific Museum</a> Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Communications regarding worker injury Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource CC BY-NC-ND Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 1930 Subject The topic of the resource Accident, Workers Compensation, Letters Description An account of the resource Small Stack of thin paper attached with a metal binding. Letters regarding a worker's accident and compensation claim. Some pages are faded may be hard to read. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 1-0192 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Union Pacific Coal Co.