Riggs v. Lehigh Portland Cement Company

• Decision Date: 31 May 1921
• Docket Number: 10,901
• Citation: 131 N.E. 231,76 Ind.App. 308
• Parties: RIGGS v. LEHIGH PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

131 N.E. 231

76 Ind.App. 308

RIGGS v. LEHIGH PORTLAND CEMENT COMPANY

No. 10,901

Court of Appeals of Indiana

May 31, 1921

Rehearing denied October 4, 1921.

From the Industrial Board of Indiana.

Proceedings for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Lelia Irene Riggs against the Lehigh Portland Cement Company. From an order denying compensation, the applicant appeals.

Affirmed.

Shirts and Talbott, for appellant.

Pickens Moores, Davidson and Pickens, for appellee.

OPINION

DAUSMAN, P. J.

On November 15, 1918, one Fred Riggs, while in the employment of the cement company, received an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment which resulted in his death on that date. He left two dependents, viz., his wife Ida Riggs, and his daughter Lelia Irene Riggs who was then about four years of age. On January 22, 1919, the cement company entered into an agreement with Ida Riggs by the terms of which the cement company agreed to pay the mother, for herself and her child, compensation at the rate of $ 13.20 per week, for 300 weeks, in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Law. The agreement was approved by the Industrial Board and thereby became in effect an award.

It is conceded that at the date of the award the law provided that the marriage of the mother should terminate the dependency of the child. § 38 Workmen's Compensation Act (Acts 1915 p. 392, § 8020l et seq. Burns' Supp. 1918).

At the 1919 session of the legislature said § 38, supra, was amended. By that amendment it is provided that the marriage of a widow shall terminate her own dependency but not the dependency of her child. Acts 1919 p. 158.

On September 10, 1919, after the amendment had become effective, the widow married one Elza O. Todd and has lived with him continuously since the marriage. At the time of the death of her father, and continuously since that time, the child Lelia Irene Riggs has lived with her mother.

On October 31, 1919, the cement company filed its application to review the award on account of a change of conditions, and for the purpose of being relieved from further payments of compensation on the ground that the widow had married. Thereupon the board ordered that payment of compensation cease from and after the date of the marriage.

Lelia Irene Riggs was not named as a party to either of the foregoing proceedings before the board.

On March 11, 1920, Lelia Irene Riggs, by her next friend Ida Riggs Todd, filed her application for the purpose of procuring an order for the payment of compensation to her notwithstanding the marriage of her mother. Upon the hearing the full board ordered that the plaintiff take nothing by her application and that she pay the costs. The appeal is from this last order.

Did the amendment confer any benefit upon the child? In other words, are the rights of the parties to be determined by the original act or by the amendatory act? In the application of a statute two general propositions must be kept in mind. (1) It is essential that any conflict with constitutional limitations be avoided. (2) Legislation should be given a prospective, rather than a retroactive, effect.

It is the duty of the Industrial Board, when making an award, to fix the rights of the parties in accordance with the law as it existed at the time of the injury to the workman. In the case at bar the...