T. J. Moss Tie Co. v. Indus. Comm'n
| Decision Date | 10 June 1947 |
| Parties | T. J. MOSS TIE CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Dane County; Herman W. Sachtjen, Judge.
Affirmed.
This is an action to review an order of the Industrial Commission ordering the plaintiff, T. J. Moss Tie Company, to pay to the defendant Fannie Mae Hackard certain benefits under sec. 102.47 Stats., as a result of the death of Joseph Schofield.
Schofield, a married man, lived with Ruby Ragland, an unmarried woman. Her minor child, Fannie, had been living with them for a short time prior to an injury which Schofield suffered and for which he was awarded compensation for permanent disability under ch. 102, Stats. Thereafter, he died as the result of another accident, leaving a balance of unpaid compensation due him. The Industrial Commission fund that Fannie was a member of Schofield's family, wholly dependent upon him for support, and was entitled under sec. 102.47, Stats., to the unpaid compensation.
The circuit court set aside the Commission's order on the ground that Fannie was not a member of Schofield's family. The Commission appeals.
John E. Martin, Atty. Gen., and Mortimer Levitan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
Charles H. Gorman, of Milwaukee, for respondent.
The sole question is whether Fannie Mae Hackard was a dependent of Schofield under the law providing for payment of workmen's compensation benefits. Sec. 102.51(2), Stats., as effective at the time of Schofield's death and which remains unchanged, provides:
We have said that blood relationship is not necessary to establish membership in a family under the statute. Duluth-Superior Milling Co. v. Industrial Comm., 1937, 226 Wis. 187, 275 N.W. 515,276 N.W. 300. However, we also said in Armstrong v. Industrial Commission, 1915, 161 Wis. 530, 154 N.W. 844, and Hall v. Industrial Commission, 1917, 165 Wis. 364, 162 N.W. 312, L.R.A.1917D, 829, that such a family relationship implies a legitimate tie and is not created by a man and woman living together not bound by ties of marriage.
Other courts called upon to decide the question hold that a child occupying the status of Fannie is entitled to death benefits under statutes comparable to ours. Campton v. Industrial Commission, 106 Utah 571, 151 P.2d 189,154 A.L.R. 698. Their...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Larson v. Wisconsin Dept. of Industry, Labor and Human Relations
...under the statute, but such a family relationship implies a legitimate marital tie between a man and woman. T. J. Moss Tie Co. v. Industrial Comm., 251 Wis. 57, 28 N.W.2d 884 (1947); Duluth-Superior Milling Co. v. Industrial Comm., 226 Wis. 187, 275 N.W. 515, 276 N.W. 300 (1937); Hall v. In......
-
Waunakee Canning Corp. v. Industrial Commission
...actual dependency upon the father. Appellants contend that this cause is controlled by the rule in T. J. Moss Tie Co. v. Industrial Comm., 1947, 251 Wis. 57, 27 N.W.2d 725, 726, 28 N.W.2d 884. There the child was that of a woman with whom the deceased had lived but the deceased was not the ......