Gregg v. New Careyville Coal Co.
| Decision Date | 18 October 1930 |
| Citation | 31 S.W.2d 693 |
| Parties | GREGG v. NEW CAREYVILLE COAL CO. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Agee & Guy, of Jacksboro, for complainant.
Smith, Carlock, & Poore, of Knoxville, for defendant.
The complainant sued the New Careyville Coal Company, his employer, for $314, which the company retained out of the total sum awarded under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Pub. Acts 1919, c. 123). The chancellor dismissed the bill. The Court of Appeals, taking the view that the money could not be retained under the assignment made by Gregg to defendant because violative of section 18 of the Compensation Law, reversed the decree of the chancellor. Section 18 reads as follows:
"No claim for compensation under this Act shall be assignable, and all compensation and claims therefor shall be exempt from claims of creditors."
The Compensation Act is designed to relieve society of an economic burden through its provisions for the injured employee and those dependent upon him, and section 18, above quoted, was intended to prevent diversion of the compensation to objects beyond the purposes of the act, and so the employee cannot defeat the objects of the act by assigning his claim for compensation to third persons so as to give such persons a right of action against the employer, nor could he assign the claim or any portion of it even to his employer in payment of antecedent debts.
For similar reasons the claim for compensation was made exempt from execution and attachment. Otherwise the objects of the legislation would be defeated through actions by creditors seeking to recover antecedent debts. While this is true, the benefits and burdens attending the act arising as they do out of contract, the foregoing section ought not be extended by construction beyond the objects sought to be accomplished. There is no provision of the act that would forbid an employee obtaining credit or advancements pending adjustment of his claim where it clearly appeared that both parties were acting in good faith.
The facts shown by this record, and upon which the decree of the chancellor rested, are substantially as follows:
Gregg, an employee of the coal company, was injured. The coal company recognized its liability to its injured employee but expected the insurance company that carried its compensation insurance to settle the claim. Gregg understood this, and understood, too, that the insurance company was delaying the settlement. Pending settlement Gregg...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. Department of Public Welfare, City of Newark
...Court of Appeals of Kentucky held that their statute, similar to ours, permitted no set off. See also Gregg v. New Careyville Coal Co., 161 Tenn. 350, 31 S.W.2d 693 (Tenn.Sup.Ct.1930); Prime v. Dunaway, 164 Tenn. 396, 50 S.W.2d 223 It is well settled that the award is "in lieu of wages'.' K......
-
In re Haffner
...473, 129 A.2d 56 (County Ct. 1957); Byrd v. Pioneer-Jellico Coal Co., 180 Tenn. 396, 175 S.W.2d 542 (1943); Gregg v. New Careyville Coal Co., 161 Tenn. 350, 31 S.W.2d 693 (1930). The rationale for the rule has been summarized as Exemption privileges allowed by statute are to be liberally co......
-
Dean v. Safety Casualty Co.
...the regular salary was paid. Ruehmann v. Consumers' Ice & Fuel Co., 192 Minn. 596, 257 N.W. 501, 96 A.L. R. 1015; Gregg v. New Careyville Coal Co., 161 Tenn. 350, 31 S.W.2d 693; State ex rel. Hunt & D. Mfg. Co. v. Industrial Commission, 108 Ohio St. 139, 140 N.E. 621; Western Casualty Co. v......
-
Ida Pfefer, Admx. of the Estate of Hortense Stern, Deceased v. Winer & Saroff Commission Co. And Continental Casualty Company
...right to enforce payment survives. [Monson v. Battelle, 102 Kan. 208, 170 P. 801; Haugse v. Sommers Bros. Mfg. Co., 254 P. 212; Gregg v. Coal Co., 31 S.W.2d 693.] is a leading case holding the contrary view, to-wit, Ray v. Industrial Ins. Commission, 99 Wash. 176, 168 P. 1121. But the Washi......