Lippard v. Southeastern Express Co.

177 S.E. 801, 207 N.C. 507, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 185
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 1, 1935
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 177 S.E. 801 (Lippard v. Southeastern Express Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lippard v. Southeastern Express Co., 177 S.E. 801, 207 N.C. 507, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 185 (N.C. 1935).

Opinion

OoNnok, J.

The questions of law presented by this appeal are (1) whether an illegitimate child born after the death of its father, who before his death had acknowledged his paternity of the child, is a dependent of its deceased father, within the provisions of the North Carolina Workmen’s Compensation Act, and (2) if so, whether such child is entitled to share with children of its deceased father who were born of his marriage to their mother, from whom their father had been divorced prior to his death, in the compensation awarded under the act to his dependents.

Both of these questions must be answered in the affirmative.

The provisions of the North Carolina Workmen’s Compensation Act (chapter 120, Public Laws of N. C., 1929) which are pertinent to the questions presented by this appeal are as follows:

*509 1. “A widow, a widower, and/or a child shall be conclusively presumed to be wholly dependent for support upon the deceased employee. . . . If there is more than one person wholly dependent, the death benefit shall be divided among them; the persons partly dependent, if any, shall receive no part thereof.” Sec. 39, ch. 120, Public Laws of N. C., 1929. Sec. 8081 (uu), N. C. Code, 1931.

2. “The term ‘child’ shall include a posthumous child, a child legally adopted prior to the injury of the employee, and a step-child or acknowledged illegitimate child dependent upon the deceased, but does not include married children unless wholly dependent upon him.” Sec. 2, ch. 120, Public Laws of N. C., 1929. See. 8081 (i), N. C. Code of 1931.

The fact that the illegitimate child, whose paternity was acknowledged by the deceased employee prior to his death, was born after his death does not affect the relationship between the child and its father. The dependency which the statute recognizes as the basis of the right of the child to compensation grows out of the relationship, which in itself imposes upon the father the duty to support the child, and confers upon the child the right to support by its father. The status of the child, social or legal, is immaterial.

The philosophy of the common law, which denied an illegitimate child any rights, legal or social, as against its father, and imposed no duty upon the father with respect to the child, is discarded by the statute. The child is no less the child of its father because it was born after his death. The statute expressly provides that the compensation shall be divided among the dependents of the deceased employee. The judgment of the Superior Court is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jackson v. Garner
North Carolina Industrial Commission, 1995
Winstead v. Derreberry
326 S.E.2d 66 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1985)
Flemon v. Dickert-Keowee, Inc.
190 S.E.2d 751 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1972)
Hewett Ex Rel. Wilson v. Garrett
163 S.E.2d 372 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)
Hewett v. Garrett
161 S.E.2d 157 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)
Williams v. American Employers Insurance Company
110 So. 2d 541 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1959)
Wilson v. UTAH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
89 S.E.2d 864 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1955)
American Mutual Liability Ins. v. Hogan
87 S.E.2d 661 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1955)
BARR'S NEXT OF KIN v. Cherokee, Inc.
68 S.E.2d 440 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1951)
C. F. Wheeler Company v. Pullins
11 So. 2d 303 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
177 S.E. 801, 207 N.C. 507, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 185, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lippard-v-southeastern-express-co-nc-1935.