Gulf States Ceramic v. Fenster
| Decision Date | 01 December 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 26676,26676 |
| Citation | 228 Ga. 400,185 S.E.2d 801 |
| Parties | GULF STATES CERAMIC, a division of United States Ceramic Corporation, v. Theo D. FENSTER. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Gambrell, Russell, Killorin, Wade & Forbes, Edward W. Killorin, Sewell K. Loggins, Atlanta, for appellant.
Hugh H. Howell, Jr., Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
This is a certiorari. The Court of Appeals' decision complained of holds, 'A husband, not dependent upon the wife under Code § 114-414(b), is not precluded from recovering for loss of consortium occasioned by injuries received by the wife as a result of the negligent act of the wife's employer where the wife has received compensation for her injuries under the Workmen's Compensation Act, but not under Chapter 8 thereof.' Fenster v. Gulf States Ceramic, 124 Ga.App. 102, 182 S.E.2d 905. Held:
We disagree with the Court of Appeals. The Workmen's Compensation Act provides: 'The rights and remedies herein granted to an employee where he and his employer have accepted the provisions of this Title, agreeing respectively to accept and pay compensation on account of personal injury or death by accident, shall exclude all other rights and remedies of such employee, his personal representative, parents, dependents or next of kin, at common law or otherwise, on account of such injury, loss of service or death.' Code § 114-103. The act also provides that the husband under certain circumstances is conclusively presumed to be the 'next of kin.' Code § 114-114(b). Construing these two Code sections together, we conclude that the Act includes the husband in the category of 'next of kin.' Consequently his action for loss of consortium is barred. 2 Larson, Workmen's Compensation Law § 66.20, p. 152.1. Napier v. Martin, 194 Tenn. 105, 250 S.E.2d 35 construed almost identical provisions of the Tennessee Workmen's Compensation Act and stated that there was a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mattison v. Kirk
...statutory language similar to that in Code 1975, § 25-5-53 (1975), but also under general statutory language); Gulf States Ceramic v. Fenster, 228 Ga. 400, 185 S.E.2d 801 (1971); Nichols v. Benco Plastics, Inc., 225 Tenn. 334, 469 S.W.2d 135, 137 (1971) (intent of workmen's compensation act......
-
Massey v. Thiokol Chemical Corporation
...96 Ga.App. 621, 100 S.E.2d 621; Stone Mountain Memorial Association v. Herrington, 225 Ga. 746, 749, 171 S.E.2d 521; Gulf States Ceramic v. Fenster, 228 Ga. 400, 185 S. E.2d 801. The Supreme Court said in Fenster that the legislative intent was to bring "the entire family group" within the ......
-
Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. v. Maverick Materials, Inc.
...in tort (see Fenster v. Gulf States Ceramic, 124 Ga.App. 102, 107, 182 S.E.2d 905, revd. on other grounds, Gulf States Ceramic v. Fenster, 228 Ga. 400, 185 S.E.2d 801; Central of Ga. R. Co. v. Lester, 118 Ga.App. 794, 800(2), 803, 165 S.E.2d 587), it does not immunize the employer from cont......
-
Derosia v. Book Press, Inc.
...of Georgia statute barring claims by "personal representative, parents, dependents, or next of kin"); Gulf States Ceramic v. Fenster, 228 Ga. 400, 401, 185 S.E.2d 801, 801 (1971); Sneed v. Carolina Power & Light Co., 61 N.C.App. 309, 310-11, 300 S.E.2d 563, 564 (1983) (North Carolina G.S. 9......