Mozley v. American General Ins. Co.
Decision Date | 13 May 1959 |
Docket Number | No. 13466,13466 |
Citation | 324 S.W.2d 925 |
Parties | Anna Mae MOZLEY et al., Appellants, v. AMERICAN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Putman & Putman, San Antonio, far appellants.
Clemens, Knight, Weiss & Spencer, George H. Spencer, San Antonio, for appellee.
This suit was instituted by Anna Mae Mozley and Jack Collens Mozley, widow and minor son, respectively of Jack Clarence Mozley, deceased, seeking to recover death benefits under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Article 8306 et seq., on the life of Jack Clarence Mozley, deceased, hereinafter referred to as Jack Mozley. The employer was Longhorn Portland Cement Company of San Antonio, Texas, and the insurance carrier, American General Insurance Company.
Jack Mozley died on July 2, 1957, allegedly as a result of an injury which he received while employed at Longhorn Portland Cement Company. The widow and son filed a notice of fatal injury and a claim for compensation within due time, as provided by law. In both the notice of fatal injury and claim for compensation, they described the cause of death as being 'sudden on the job strain which caused rupture of aortic aneurysm into midesophagus.' The date of the injury was given as the 13th day of June, 1957.
The Industrial Accident Board in due time, after proper hearing, refused the claim. The claimants gave notice of appeal, and in due time instituted this suit. In their petition they alleged that on or about the 13th day of June, 1957, 'while in the course of his employment for Longhorn Portland Cement Company at San Antonio, Bexar County, Texas, Jack Clarence Mozley, husband of Anna Mae Mozley, sustained an accidental injury which said injury resulted in his death on or about July 2, 1957.' This suit was filed on February 12, 1958. Thereafter, on March 4, 1958, the American General Insurance Company filed its answer and excepted to plaintiffs' petition in the following language:
In response to this special exception, the plaintiffs filed a trial amendment alleging, among other things, the following:
Thereafter defendant filed its plea in abatement and first amended original answer alleging, among other things, as follows:
'1. As shown by certified copies attached hereto, on December 5, 1957, the plaintiffs herein, through their attorney, filed with the Texas Industrial Accident Board in its cause No. R-62,216, a notice of fatal injury wherein it was alleged that on June 13, 1957, Jack C. Mozley sustained a fatal injury at the plant of his employer, Longhorn Portland Cement Company, and that 'the cause of death was sudden on the job strain which caused rupture of the aortic aneurism into midesophagus.'
'2. Based upon such claim, the Industrial Accident Board rendered the following award:
Attached to the plea in abatement were the proceedings had before the Industrial Accident Board.
On November 18, 1958, the trial court entered judgment sustaining the plea in abatement and dismissing the cause, from which action Anna Mae Mozley and Jack Collens Mozley have prosecuted this appeal.
The question here presented is whether or not the injury described in the trial amendment is the same injury described in the notice and claim. It is quite clear that the injury described in the petition is a different injury from the one described in the notice and claim.
Section 4a of Article 8307, Vernon's Ann.Civ.Stats., provides as follows:
It is well settled that unless the employer is given notice of the injury and the claim is acted upon by the Industrial Accident Board, the courts have no jurisdiction to hear and determine a suit for compensation based on such injury. Heard v. Texas Compensation Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 87...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Brock v. Public Service Elec. & Gas Co.
... ... denied, 75 N.J. 605, 384 A.2d 835 (1978); Buzza v. General Motors Corp., 49 N.J.Super. 322, 333, 139 A.2d 790 (App.Div.1958) ... Calabria v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 4 N.J.Super. 528, 68 A.2d 283 (App.Div.1949), aff'd, 4 N.J. 64, 68, ... Industrial Comm'n, 397 Ill. 348, 74 N.E.2d 539, 540-41 (1947); Mozley v. American Gen. Ins. Co., 324 S.W.2d 925, 927 ... Tex.Civ.App.1959); ... ...
-
Brock v. Public Service Elec. & Gas Co.
...160 Colo. 113, 414 P.2d 480 (1966); Ferguson v. Industrial Comm'n, 397 Ill. 348, 74 N.E.2d 539 (1947); Mozley v. American General Ins. Co., 324 S.W.2d 925 (Tex.Civ.App.1959); Scott v. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n, 118 S.W.2d 354 (Tex.Civ.App.1938). Indeed, it has been held that, in the absen......
-
Mercer v. Phillips Natural Gas Co.
...20 (whether proof of jurisdictional facts shows an amendment to pleadings would cure); see also Mozley v. American General Insurance Co., 324 S.W.2d 925 (Tex.Civ.App.1959, writ ref'd n.r.e.). The Fayette County Court was granted eminent domain jurisdiction by the passage of H.B. 2413. Appel......
-
Consolidated Underwriters v. Wright
...to the pleading which would have afforded appellee an opportunity to amend his pleading if defective. In Mozley v. American General Insurance Company, Tex.Civ.App., 324 S.W.2d 925, writ ref., n.r.e., the court said: 'This fatal variance in the claim presented to the Board and the one stated......