Pauley v. State Comp. Comm'r, (No. 7263)
Decision Date | 02 February 1932 |
Docket Number | (No. 7263) |
Parties | W. D. Pauley v. State Compensation Commissioner |
Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
Master and Servant
If a claimant for compensation from the workmen's compensation fund makes no objection to a definite rejection of his entire claim by the state compensation commissioner within ten days after receiving notice thereof, the claim is closed. The commissioner has no jurisdiction after the ten day period, to reopen the claim on evidence substantially the same as theretofore submitted.
Mandamus proceeding by W. D. Pauley against the State Compensation Commissioner.
Writ denied.
Lively & Stambaugh, for relator.
Howard B. Lee, Attorney General, and B. Dennis Steed, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Hatcher, President:
Mandamus is sought to compel the commissioner to hear and set a date for taking evidence in this case. A chron- ology follows: On November 19, 1926, C. H. Pauley, aged 22 years, met death while in the employ of a subscriber to the Workmen's Compensation Fund. On January 12, 1927, W. D. Pauley, deceased's father, filed a claim (supported by an affidavit) for compensation as a partial dependent of his son, stating that claimant's earnings were $100.00 per month, and that "approximately $50.00 was contributed to his support by decendent for the year preceding the death. On January 13, 1927, the commissioner instructed claimant to furnish proof of dependency. Nothing was done further until March 30, 1931, when the commisioner, after a visit from deceased's mother, again requested proof of dependency of claimant, on April 3rd an affidavit of Mrs. Pauley was filed, stating that deceased had contributed $10.00 per week for the support of the family, which was used to pay for groceries, together with a certificate of George Russel, stating that while deceased was working in the coal mines he "used to help financially his parents." On April 10th the commissioner requested an inspector of his department to investigate the case. The inspector took the affdavits of Mr. and Mrs. Pauley, from which he reported: On May 22, 1931, the commissioner mailed a notice to claimant that compensation was refused on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bailey v. SWCC
..."jurisdiction" was current in cases where the commissioner sought to reopen closed claims. See, e.g., Pauley v. State Compensation Commissioner, 111 W.Va. 456, 162 S.E. 891, 892 (1932); Burdette v. State Compensation Commissioner, 111 W.Va. 299, 161 S.E. 556, 557 (1931). It was also current......
-
Reed v. Compensation Com'r
... ... 37 REED v. COMPENSATION COM'R et al. No. 9275.Supreme Court of Appeals of West ... that time. Pauley v. Commissioner, 111 W.Va. 456, ... 162 S.E ... ...
-
Reed v. Comp. Comm'r.
...124 W.Va. 37Tom Reedv.Compensation Commissioner et al.(No. 9275)Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.Submitted ... Pauley v. Commissioner, 111 W. Va. 456, 162 S. E. 891; Burdette v ... ...
-
Adkins v. State Compensation Director
...after receipt of the notice thereof. Enyart v. State Compensation Commissioner, 109 W.Va. 613, 155 S.E. 913; Pauley v. State Compensation Commissioner, 111 W.Va. 456, 162 S.E. 891. When limitation begins to run with regard to the filing of an objection to the ruling of the Compensation Comm......