Brown v. City of Pipestone
| Decision Date | 15 July 1932 |
| Docket Number | 28,976 |
| Citation | 245 N.W. 145,186 Minn. 540 |
| Parties | EMMA BROWN v. CITY OF PIPESTONE AND ANOTHER |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
In a proceeding under the workmen's compensation act an award was made on October 21, 1930, to Emma Brown against the city of Pipestone and the Travelers Insurance Company for the death of her husband while employed as a volunteer fireman for the city. On February 7, 1931, the insurer tendered plaintiff $2,841.60, representing installments which should have been paid for the period from April 2, 1928, to February 2, 1931. Plaintiff refused the tender because it did not include interest. On February 8, 1932, judgment was entered Howard, J. in the district court for Pipestone county pursuant to G.S. 1923 (1 Mason, 1927) § 4318, for the aggregate amount of the installments, plus interest. From the judgment so entered defendants appealed. Affirmed.
Workmen's compensation act -- compensation -- interest on deferred installments.
Workmen's compensation liability in this state arises from the contract of employment and is a legal indebtedness upon which interest at the legal rate accrues from the date when each installment of compensation should have been made under the act.
S B. Wilson, Jr., L. N. Foster, and E. A. Linnee, for appellants.
George P. Gurley, for respondent.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered by the district court under G.S. 1923 (1 Mason, 1927) § 4318, of the workmen's compensation act.
April 2, 1928, Alza D. Brown, a volunteer fireman in the employ of appellant city, died from causes subsequently held by the industrial commission to be compensable. His widow, this respondent, was on October 21, 1930, awarded compensation at the rate of $19.20 per week from the date of his death, subject to the statutory limitation.
February 7, 1931, the insurer began paying the installments as provided in the commission's order. On that day the insurer tendered respondent $2,841.60 as compensation from April 2, 1928, to February 2, 1931. This amount was in the sum of the installments which should have been paid without interest. Respondent refused the tender because it did not include the interest. April 10, 1932, she was paid the $2,841.60 without prejudice to her right to claim interest. February 8, 1932, judgment was entered in the district court under § 4318, for the aggregate sum of the installments, plus interest at the legal rate, it being assumed that the $2,841.60 was to be credited as of February 2, 1931.
The sole question raised by this appeal is whether or not unpaid installments of compensation bear interest at the legal rate from the date when under the provisions of the compensation act they should have been paid.
G.S. 1923 (1 Mason, 1927) § 4269, makes it the duty of the employer to commence payment of compensation without the necessity of any agreement or order. Compensation in this state is a liability arising out of the contract of employment, and the compensation act becomes a part of every contract of employment. Mathison v. Minneapolis St. Ry. Co. 126 Minn. 286, 148 N.W. 71, L.R.A. 1916D, 412; State ex rel. Chambers v. District Court, 139 Minn. 205, 166 N.W. 185, 3 A.L.R. 1347. The compensation act makes no mention of interest in case of delay of payment, but G.S. 1923 (2 Mason, 1927) § 7036, imposes interest at six per cent as damages for failure to pay a debt when due.
Here was a contract debt due at the times when the compensation installments should have been paid under the provisions of the act, and we see no reason why it should not, like any other debt, bear interest at the legal rate when it is subsequently decided that the debt existed. The Iowa workmen's compensation act, like our own, makes no...
To continue reading
Request your trial