Spokane County v. Arvin, 23834.
| Decision Date | 19 August 1932 |
| Docket Number | 23834. |
| Citation | 169 Wash. 349,13 P.2d 1089 |
| Parties | SPOKANE COUNTY v. ARVIN. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2.
Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; William A. Huneke Judge.
Action by Spokane County against H. W. Arvin, as guardian of the estate of Thomas McHarg, an incompetent. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Cause remanded, with direction to modify judgment.
W. J Lindberg and Cannon, McKevitt & Eraser, all of Spokane, for appellant.
Charles W. Greenough and A. O. Colburn, both of Spokane, for respondent.
Spokane county brought this action to recover from H. W. Arvin, as guardian of the estate of Thomas McHarg, an incompetent person, for food, lodging, medical care, and other necessities furnished the ward. The cause was tried to the court without a jury, and resulted in findings of fact from which it was concluded that the claim should be sustained. Judgment was entered directing the guardian to pay the claim which had been presented to him out of the estate of the ward in the sum of $840. From this judgment the guardian appeals.
There is no dispute in the facts, and they may be stated as follws: Thomas McHarg, the incompetent person, prior to May, 1929, was employed as a trucker in the Northern Pacific Railway Company's freighthouse at Spokane. As such employee, he carried a group insurance policy in the sum of $1,500. McHarg paid 70 cents a month premium upon the policy, which was for $1,000, and the railway company paid on the other $500. During the month of May, 1929, it was reported to the county authorities that McHarg was acting peculiarly, and that he was apparently destitute. In response to this call, an investigation was made, and McHarg was taken into custody by the sheriff's office and sent to the county home for the indigent as Spangle.
The county authorities made an investigation and concluded that McHarg had no resources, and that he had no relatives who could be required to support him. After he was sent to the county home or county poor farm, he was taken care of in the ordinary manner as a destitute person.
Subsequent to June, 1929, the premium on McHarg's insurance policy was paid by the station employees' organization. The premiums thus paid amounted to $20.30. In March, 1931, the secretary of the organization paying the premiums suggested to an attorney that steps be taken to recover upon the total disability provision of the insurance policy. In pursuance of this suggestion, and on April 22, 1931, H. W. Arvin was appointed guardian of the estate of Thomas McHarg, and the latter was declared to be an incompetent person. Application was then made to the insurance company for payment upon the policy, and on August 31, 1931, the company, under the disability clause, paid to the guardian the sum of $1,500. Upon receipt of the money, the guardian offered to pay the county for the keep of McHarg from that time on, but the county made a claim for his keep from the time he was first taken to the home in the sum of $840. The claim' was rejected by the guardian, and the present action was instituted. At the time McHarg was sent to the home, he had no property and was destitute. The group insurance policy, held by McHarg at the time of his commitment, had no surrender cash value.
The question presented is whether the county had the right to recover from the guardian for the keep of the ward subsequent to his commitment and prior to the time that the insurance company paid the $1,500 to the guardian under the total disability clause in the policy. In section 9982, Rem. Comp Stat., it is provided that every poor person who shall be unable to earn a livelihood, in consequence of bodily infirmity or other cause, shall be supported by relatives stated therein, when directed to do so by the board of county commissioners, and, if such relatives fail to comply with the order, they shall forfeit and pay to the county the sum of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lucido v. Rippeto
...County. There was no mistake nor misrepresentation nor deception;' therefore no right to recover without statute); Spokane County v. Arvin (1932) 169 Wash. 349, 13 Pac.2d 1089 (incompetent in county poor farm who had railroad insurance policy for disability--No cash surrender value at time ......
-
Conaway v. Social Services Admin.
...(1975); Neunz v. Summit Cty. Children Services Bd., 54 Ohio St.2d 218, 8 Ohio Ops.3d 193, 375 N.E.2d 798 (1978); Spokane County v. Arvin, 169 Wash. 349, 13 P.2d 1089 (1932). Article 88A of the Maryland Code does not establish a child's liability to reimburse the State for foster care paymen......