Arnold v. Indemnity Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 22 October 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 36382,No. 2,36382,2 |
| Parties | Gelord ARNOLD v. INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
James A. Bagwell, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Smith, Field, Doremus & Ringel, Palmer H. Ansley, Atlanta, for defendants in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. 'When this court discovers from the record that a judgment [or an award] has been rendered by a court [or the State Board of Workmen's Compensation] having no jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and the case is brought here for review upon writ of error, this court will of its own motion reverse the judgment.' Smith v. Ferrario, 105 Ga. 51, 53, 31 S.E. 38, 39; Cutts v. Scandrett, 108 Ga. 620, 34 S.E. 186.
2. It is a well established rule that an award of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation, based upon an agreement between an injured employee and his employer, providing for compensation under the terms of the Workmen's Compensation Act for an injury sustained by the employee, is, in the absence of fraud, accident, or mistake, binding on the parties. Rourke v. U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 187 Ga. 636, 1 S.E.2d 728; Gravitt v. Georgia Casualty Co., 158 Ga. 613, 123 S.E. 897; Home Accident Ins. Co. v. McNair, 173 Ga. 566, 161 S.E. 131; Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Cook, 195 Ga. 397, 24 S.E.2d 309; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. McFarley, 191 Ga. 334, 12 S.E.2d 355; American Mutual Liability Ins. Co. v. Jenkins, 63 Ga.App. 777, 783, 12 S.E.2d 80; Teems v. American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., 41 Ga.App. 100, 151 S.E. 826; South v. Indemnity Insurance Co., 39 Ga.App. 47(3), 146 S.E. 45.
3. Where the parties have entered into an agreement which has been approved by the State Board of Workmen's Compensation and payments have been made thereunder, the board is without jurisdiction to re-open the case upon any grounds other than a change in condition for which provision is made in Code, § 114-709 after the expiration of the 30-day period allowed for appeal to the superior court by Code, § 114-710. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Morgan, 199 Ga. 179, 33 S.E.2d 336.
4. While by the terms of Code, § 114-706, it is provided: 'If the employer and the injured employee or his dependents fail to reach an agreement in regard to compensation under this Title, or if they have reached such an agreement which has been signed and filed with the State Board of Workmen's Compensation, and compensation has been paid, or is due in accordance therewith, and the parties thereto then disagree as to the continuance of any weekly payment under such agreement, either party may make application to the board for a hearing in regard to the matters at issue, and for a ruling thereon.' This Code section must be construed in pari materia with other sections of the Title in general and with Code, § 114-709 in particular. Under such a construction, Code, § 114-706 has reference to disagreements between the parties prior to the time the agreement has been approved by the board, and this section does not authorize the board to re-open a case in which an agreement has been approved by the board. After approval of the agreement, the board's jurisdiction is confined to the question of whether there has been a change in condition under the terms of Code, § 114-709. See in this connection Wilkins v. Travelers Ins. Co., 52 Ga.App. 142, 182 S.E. 628. All other questions are res adjudicata. South v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 39 Ga.App. 47, 146 S.E. 45.
5. Under an application of the foregoing principles of law to the facts of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Bridges, 39683
...v. Simpson, 101 Ga.App. 480(3), 114 S.E.2d 141; National Union Ins. Co. v. Mills, 99 Ga.App. 697, 109 S.E.2d 830; Arnold v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 94 Ga.App. 493(3), 95 S.E.2d 29; Dempsey v. Chevrolet Division, 102 Ga.App. 408, 116 S.E.2d 509; United States Casualty Co. v. Smith, 34 Ga.App. 36......
-
Hanover Ins. Co. v. Jones
...v. Simpson, 101 Ga.App. 480(3), 114 S.E.2d 141; National Union Ins. Co. v. Mills, 99 Ga.App. 697, 109 S.E.2d 830; Arnold v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 94 Ga.App. 493(3), 95 S.E.2d 29; Dempsey v. Chevrolet Division, 102 Ga.App. 408, 116 S.E.2d 509; U. S. Cas. Co. v. Smith, 34 Ga.App. 363(1), 129 S.......
-
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Wilson, 20604
...v. Stephens, 76 Ga.App. 723, 47 S.E.2d 108; Travelers Insurance Co. v. Hammond, 90 Ga.App. 595, 83 S.E.2d 576; Arnold v. Indemnity Insurance Co., 94 Ga.App. 493, 95 S.E.2d 29. It having been determined by this court in a full bench decision that an award of the Workmen's Compensation Board ......
-
Employers Liability Assur. Corp. v. Whitlock
...made after a hearing of the issues. Georgia Marine Salvage Co. v. Merritt, 82 Ga.App. 111, 114(1), 60 S.E.2d 419; Arnold v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 94 Ga.App. 493(2), 95 S.E.2d 29; National Union Ins. Co. v. Mills, 99 Ga.App. 697, 698, 109 S.E.2d 830; Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Wilson, 215 Ga. 746......