Flint River Mills v. Henry
| Decision Date | 13 May 1975 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 29614,29615,s. 29614 |
| Citation | 216 S.E.2d 895,234 Ga. 385 |
| Parties | FLINT RIVER MILLS et al. v. Lori Juanita HENRY by n/f et al. STATE BOARD OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION et al. v. Lori Juanita HENRY by n/f et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers, Glover McGhee, Gregory N. Studdard, Atlanta, for Flint River Mills and others.
Ben Kirbo, Ralph C. Smith, Jr., Bainbridge, Wayne P. Yancey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for Henry and others in No. 29614.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Wayne P. Yancey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for State Board of Workmen's Compensation and others.
Ben Kirbo, Ralph C. Smith, Jr., Bainbridge, Glover McGhee, Atlanta, for Henry and others in No. 29615.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
This appeal comes to us upon a petition for injunction and declaratory judgment.
On December 10, 1973, Curtis Henry, an employee of Flint River Mills, suffered an accidental injury which arose out of and in the course of his employment and which caused his death.
At the time of death the deceased employee had six natural children under age 18. Their mother had died in 1971 and these children were living with their maternal grandmother in a home being purchased by their father. Aside from their deceased mother's social security benefits, the deceased employee was the sole source of support for these children.
Following his first wife's death, the deceased employee remarried. At the time of his death, the deceased was living with his second wife, Thelma Brown Henry, and her six children under age 18. These children thus were the stepchildren of the deceased. Their natural mother was employed. Some of these children were receiving social security benefits as a result of their father's death. The evidence is undisputed that the deceased utilized his income for the support of his natural children and contributed nothing for the support of his second wife or her children.
The deceased's natural children filed a workmen's compensation claim. On motion by the employer, the deceased's widow and his stepchildren were made parties. At a hearing before the Deputy Director of the Board of Workmen's Compensation held on March 11, 1974, the widow testified that she was not seeking workmen's compensation for herself or her children.
Following the close of the record in the workmen's compensation case but prior to decision by the Deputy Director, this suit was instituted on May 10, 1974, by the deceased's natural children, by next friend, for declaratory judgment that Code § 114-414 is unconstitutional and for injunction restraining the Deputy Director from entering an award based thereon. The widow and her children did not answer. The employer, its workmen's compensation carrier, and the Board defended the constitutionality of the act. After a hearing at which the transcript of the workmen's compensation hearing was admitted into evidence, the trial court ruled in favor of the natural children, declaring unconstitutional the provisions of Code § 114-414 which establish a conclusive presumption that stepchildren are wholly dependent upon a stepparent. The employer and its workmen's compensation carrier appealed, as did the Board. The natural children of the deceased are the appellees here.
The employer and its compensation carrier assert that Senters v. Wright & Lopez, Inc., 220 Ga. 611, 140 S.E.2d 904, stands for the proposition that the natural children cannot contest the validity of the Workmen's Compensation Act upon which their claim for compensation is founded. All of the appellants urge that the stepchild provisions of Code § 114-414 are not unconstitutional. We do not reach those issues here.
Plaintiffs could have raised this constitutional challenge in the hearing before the Deputy Director. If they had, the challenge would have been ruled upon on the appeal to the superior court, as was done in Senters, supra. See also State Highway Dept. v. Bass, 197 Ga. 356, 29 S.E.2d 161, Kelley v. County of Newton, 198 Ga. 483, 32 S.E.2d 99, State Highway Dept. v. Turner, 198 Ga. 795, 32 S.E.2d 805.
We recognize that where the constitutional validity of a statute is challenged before an administrative hearing officer or board, such officer or board is powerless to declare ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Richardson v. Tennessee Bd. of Dentistry
...apply constitutional principles in determining procedures and rendering decisions in contested cases. See e.g., Flint River Mills v. Henry, 216 S.E.2d 895, 896-97 (Ga.1975) (officer of board is powerless to declare a statute unconstitutional); City of Joplin v. Industrial Comm'n of Missouri......
-
Johnsen v. Collins
...261 S.E.2d 590 (1979); Georgia Real Estate Comm'n v. Burnette, 243 Ga. 516, 516-17, 255 S.E.2d 38 (1979); Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 386-87, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975). The Northern District of Georgia, in Age Int'l, Inc. v. Miller, 830 F.Supp. 1484, 1499 (N.D.Ga.1993), aff'd, 37 F......
-
Age Intern., Inc. v. Miller
...hearing officer or board, such officer or board is powerless to declare the Act unconstitutional...." Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 386, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975). Even if an agency could consider the constitutionality of the application of a statute to a party, the court finds it un......
-
Belco Petroleum Corp. v. State Bd. of Equalization
...statute. Yakima County Clean Air Authority v. Glascam Builders, Inc., 1975, 85 Wash.2d 255, 534 P.2d 33, 34; Flint River Mills v. Henry, 1975, 234 Ga. 385, 216 S.E.2d 895, 896-897; Herrick v. Kosydar, 1975, 44 Ohio St.2d 128, 339 N.E.2d 626, 628; Bare v. Gorton, 1974, 84 Wash.2d 380, 526 P.......
-
Administrative Law - Mark H. Cohen and David C. Will
...objection can be properly considered on review after administrative proceedings have concluded. See Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 386-87, 216 S.E.2d 895, 896-97 (1975); North Fulton Community Hosp., Inc. v. State Health Planning & Dev. Agency, 168 Ga. App. 801, 803, 310 S.E.2d 76......