Johnston v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.
This text of 581 P.2d 108 (Johnston v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The issue in this workers’ compensation case is whether claimant is entitled to benefits as the wife of decedent, whose death was the result of an accidental injury suffered during the course of his employment. The parties were never formally married, but it is claimed that under the laws of Colorado a valid common-law marriage existed.
Although Oregon does not recognize "common-law marriages,” under certain circumstances a person who had been cohabiting with a deceased worker is allowed to collect compensation. ORS 656.226.1 Kempf v. SAIF, 34 Or App 877, 580 P2d 1032, rev den (1978).
Claimant concedes that she does not qualify under ORS 656.226, but argues that a valid marriage in Colorado was established and that she is entitled to benefits as a spouse under ORS 656.204. Claimant’s position is supported by Boykin v. Industrial Accident Com., 224 Or 76, 355 P2d 724 (1960), where the Supreme Court held that a woman who had shown a valid common-law marriage under the laws of Idaho was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits as a spouse, even though the facts relied upon to establish a marriage in Idaho would not have established a marriage in Oregon. Employer argues that Boykin is not controlling since it did not face the question of whether ORS 656.226 provides the exclusive allowance of benefits for "common-law” spouses. We disagree. ORS 656.226 deals with a fact situation not present here. Where the relationship is legally established elsewhere; this state will recognize that relationship.
[234]*234The issue is, therefore, whether claimant has shown facts establishing a marriage between her and the decedent. The referee, the Workers’ Compensation Board, and the circuit court all found in favor of claimant, holding that the facts demonstrate a common-law marriage between the parties under the laws of Colorado. The employer appeals, claiming that the elements of a common-law marriage have not been shown.
We conclude, as did the hearings officer, the Board and the Circuit court, that claimant and decedent established a valid marriage under the laws of Colorado. We find from the evidence that the parties intended to be married and did in fact cohabit in Colorado as husband and wife. The elements required by Colorado law for a "common-law marriage” have been established by clear and convincing evidence. Taylor v. Taylor, 10 Colo App 303, 50 P 1049 (1897).2
Claimant has shown a valid marriage. Since decedent suffered a compensable injury under Oregon Workers’ Compensation Law, claimant is entitled to benefits.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
581 P.2d 108, 35 Or. App. 231, 1978 Ore. App. LEXIS 2729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnston-v-georgia-pacific-corp-orctapp-1978.