Georgia State Indemnification Commission v. Lyons

348 S.E.2d 642, 256 Ga. 311

• Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
• Decided: October 8, 1986
• Docket: 43485
• Status: Published

Opinions

Marshall, Chief Justice.

The Georgia State Indemnification Commission denied the application for indemnification for the death of the applicants’ father, a former guard at the Georgia State Prison at Reidsville, who died of acute pulmonary edema and cardiac arrest two days after being attacked and robbed by two inmates while on duty at the prison. The Court of Appeals, by a 5-4 vote, reversed the judgment of the Superior Court of Fulton County upholding the commission’s decision. Lyons v. Ga. State Indemnification Comm., 179 Ga. App. 86 (346 SE2d 828) (1986). We granted certiorari, and reverse.

The Court of Appeals’ majority, in reversing, rejected the conclusion of the special master, the commission, and the superior court “that the evidence in this case does not give rise to a natural inference through human experience that the assault at the prison contributed to the decedent’s heart attack” (p. 89), and held that, in their view, “the only rational inference which can be drawn from the evidence in this case is that the emotional stress suffered by the decedent as a result of the assault had not completely subsided and was a contributing factor in his death.” Id. p. 90.

However, the rule is that, even if the findings of fact urged upon the reviewing court by the appellant are supported by the evidence presented at trial, if the facts found by the special master are supported by some credible evidence, the reviewing court cannot disturb those findings. Dept. of Human Resources v. Montgomery, 248 Ga. 465 (1) (284 SE2d 263) (1981); Brook Forest Enterprises v. Paulding County, 231 Ga. 695 (1) (203 SE2d 860) (1974). “The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the board as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact . . . The court may reverse the decision or order of the board if . . . the board’s findings, inferences, conclusions, decisions, or orders are ... (4) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record . . .” OCGA § 45-20-9 (m). This language “prevents a de novo determination of evidentiary questions leaving only a determination whether the facts found by the board are supported by ‘any evidence.’ ” Hall v. Ault, 240 Ga. 585, 586 (242 SE2d 101) (1978). These principles apply in this administrative proceeding.

The special master’s findings were based upon the testimony of the two doctors who actually saw the deceased. Although there may have been conflicting evidence and conflicting expert testimony, the Court of Appeals itself has recognized that “it is not our function to weigh such evidence or judge the credibility of competing expert witnesses.” North Fulton Community Hosp. v. State Health Planning &c. Agency, 168 Ga. App. 801, 811 (310 SE2d 764) (1983).

We hold that the Court of Appeals’ majority has substituted its judgment for that of the commission as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. Therefore, we reverse that judgment and remand the case to the Court of Appeals to be reviewed under the applicable standard of whether the facts found by the commission are supported by any credible evidence.

Judgment reversed and case remanded.

All the Justices concur, except Clarke, P. J., Smith and Gregory, JJ., who dissent.