No. 05591595 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Robert Zimont.

• Case Date: May 06, 1999
• Court: Massachusetts

Massachusetts Workers Compensation 1999. No. 05591595 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Robert Zimont COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS EMPLOYEE: Robert Zimont EMPLOYER: New England Industrial Truck, Inc. INSURER: Eastern Casualty Inc. Co.BOARD NO. 05591595REVIEWING BOARD DECISION (Judges Maze-Rothstein, Carroll and Levine)APPEARANCES Nancy L. Hall, Esq., for the employee John A. Smillie, Esq., for the insurer MAZE-ROTHSTEIN, J. The claimant appeals from a decision that dismissed her workers' compensation claim for benefits as a result of her husband's death alleged to be causally related to his employment. The employee, Robert Zimont, died on September 30, 1995 due to complications from triple bypass surgery following a July 8, 1995 heart attack. The claimant asserts that the failure to apply the prima facie effect of G.L. c. 152, § 7A is error. While the judge should have applied § 7A, we agree with the insurer that the failure to do so is harmless error given his adoption of a medical opinion that the work effort in no way contributed to the employee's death. We therefore affirm the decision. The employee worked repairing forklifts, at various job sites. (Dec. 121.) The job required lifting medium to heavy articles. On July 7, 1995, Zimont worked on repairs at two different sites. When he arrived home that night, he was limping. He told his wife that he had dropped a propane tank on his foot. He went to bed early and woke up later sweating profusely. (Dec. 122.) He was rushed to the hospital, where he was diagnosed as having a myocardial infarction while there. He was hospitalized for a week. When he got home, he was completely depleted and unable to walk more than fifty yards. On September 28, 1995, he underwent triple bypass surgery. That day he suffered a stroke, which caused brain damage. Two days later he died. (Dec. 122-123.) The employee's wife (the claimant) sought workers' compensation dependency benefits. See G.L.c. 152, § 31. The claim was denied after a § 10A conference. At a de novo hearing on the appeal, the claimant introduced the expert medical opinion of Lawrence Baker, M.D. He opined that the employee's July 7, 1995 work exertions represented "the major" 1 and predominant cause of his myocardial infarction, which in turn made the triple bypass surgery necessary. In Dr. Baker's opinion, the...