"The Division of Workmen's Compensation and the Essex County Court concurred in the conclusion that petitioner had not satisfactorily established that the decedent's death was caused, contributed to or accelerated by his employment. Proceeding under Close v. Kordulak Bros., 44 N.J. 589 , 598-599 (1965), we find that the conclusions by the trial tribunals could reasonably have been reached because supported by sufficient credible proofs on the case as a whole.
We have given careful consideration to all the evidence, particularly the medical proofs. See Aladits v. Simmons Co., 47 N.J. 115, 124-126 (1966). Assuming, as did the county court, that consideration should be given to petitioner's testimony as to decedent's explanation to her concerning the effect upon him of the delivery efforts on the Friday prior to his death, we conclude that the evidence justified the county court in its determination that there was no causal relationship between those work efforts and the incident of decedent's death the following Monday while seated in a parked car reading a book.
Judgment affirmed."
PER CURIAM:
The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, supra. For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN. — 6.
For reversal — None.