Travelers Insurance v. Campbell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Travelers Insurance v. Campbell

152 S.E.2d 430, 114 Ga. App. 601, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 864

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 2, 1966

Docket42339

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 152 S.E.2d 430 (Travelers Insurance v. Campbell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Travelers Insurance v. Campbell, 152 S.E.2d 430, 114 Ga. App. 601, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 864 (Ga. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Presiding Judge.

In this ease the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation found that claimants, the mother and father of the deceased employee, were wholly dependent upon the employee at the time of his death, and rendered an award for them under Code Ann. § 114-413 (b). On appeal the superior court affirmed the board’s award. The undisputed evidence showed that at the time of the employee’s death his father earned some income as a tenant farmer. The father testified: “Q. And from your share-cropping how much did you make? A. Well, I don’t know. Not too much •—I don’t know, maybe |100 a month.” There was also evidence that brothers of the deceased employee made occasional contributions to the claimants. Held:

Contributions to the claimants by the employee’s brothers, if insubstantial or sporadic, would not preclude a finding that claimants were wholly dependent upon the employee. Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Williams, 80 Ga. App. 337 (1) (56 SE2d 157). However, a claimant is not “wholly dependent” within the meaning of Code Ann. § 114-413 (b) where he earns a substantial part of his support or receives substantial contributions from other sources than the employee. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Haygood, 81 Ga. App. 726 (59 SE2d 731). As the uncontradicted evidence revealed that the . claimants received an appreciable portion of their support from the father’s farming activities, the board was not authorized to find that claimants were wholly dependent upon the employee for their support. Appellants concede that a finding of partial dependency was demanded by the evidence.

Judgment reversed with direction that the case be remanded to the board in order that findings and an award be made, based on partial dependency under the formula provided in Code Ann. § 114-413 (c).

Argued October 5, 1966 Decided November 2, 1966 Rehearing denied November 14, 1966 Harris, Russell & Watkins, Philip R. Taylor, Joseph H. Chambless, for appellants. Hicks & Hicks, H. T. Hicks, H. Arnold Hiers, for appellees.

Judgment reversed with direction.

Jordan and Bberhardt, JJ., concur.

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

Bell, Presiding Judge.

In this ease the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation found that claimants, the mother and father of the deceased employee, were wholly dependent upon the employee at the time of his death, and rendered an award for them under Code Ann. § 114-413 (b). On appeal the superior court affirmed the board’s award. The undisputed evidence showed that at the time of the employee’s death his father earned some income as a tenant farmer. The father testified: “Q. And from your share-cropping how much did you make? A. Well, I don’t know. Not too much •—I don’t know, maybe |100 a month.” There was also evidence that brothers of the deceased employee made occasional contributions to the claimants. Held:

Contributions to the claimants by the employee’s brothers, if insubstantial or sporadic, would not preclude a finding that claimants were wholly dependent upon the employee. Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Williams, 80 Ga. App. 337 (1) (56 SE2d 157). However, a claimant is not “wholly dependent” within the meaning of Code Ann. § 114-413 (b) where he earns a substantial part of his support or receives substantial contributions from other sources than the employee. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Haygood, 81 Ga. App. 726 (59 SE2d 731). As the uncontradicted evidence revealed that the . claimants received an appreciable portion of their support from the father’s farming activities, the board was not authorized to find that claimants were wholly dependent upon the employee for their support. Appellants concede that a finding of partial dependency was demanded by the evidence.

Judgment reversed with direction that the case be remanded to the board in order that findings and an award be made, based on partial dependency under the formula provided in Code Ann. § 114-413 (c).

Argued October 5, 1966 Decided November 2, 1966 Rehearing denied November 14, 1966 Harris, Russell & Watkins, Philip R. Taylor, Joseph H. Chambless, for appellants. Hicks & Hicks, H. T. Hicks, H. Arnold Hiers, for appellees.

Judgment reversed with direction.

Jordan and Bberhardt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 S.E.2d 430, 114 Ga. App. 601, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/travelers-insurance-v-campbell-gactapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack