Zeigler v. S. C. Law Enforcement Division

• Decision Date: 03 November 1967
• Docket Number: No. 18722,18722
• Citation: 250 S.C. 326,157 S.E.2d 598
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: Mrs. Gene G. ZEIGLER, Respondent, v. S. C. LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION and State Workmen's Compensation Fund, Appellants.

Page 598

157 S.E.2d 598

250 S.C. 326

Mrs. Gene G. ZEIGLER, Respondent, v. S. C. LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION and State Workmen's Compensation Fund, Appellants.

No. 18722.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Nov. 3, 1967.

Atty. Gen., Daniel R. McLeod, Asst. Atty. Gen. Carl Reasonover, Law, Kirkland, Aaron & Alley, Columbia, S.C., for appellant.

Whaley, McCutchen, Blanton & Richardson, Columbia, for respondent.

LEWIS, Justice.

On June 20, 1964, John Byrd Zeigler, an agent of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, died from pistol shot wounds inflicted by a fellow agent, George H. Fender, Jr., during an altercation between the two men. The Industrial Commission made an award to Zeigler's widow for death benefits under the Workmen's Compensation Act, upon factual findings that Zeigler's death resulted from an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment and was not occasioned by any wilful intent on his part to injure another. The circuit judge affirmed the award and this appeal followed.

Under our view of the record, all issues on appeal are resolved by a determination of whether, under the facts, recovery is barred as a matter of law by Section 72--156 of [250 S.C. 329] the 1962 Code of Laws, which denies the right to Workmen's Compensation benefits 'if the injury or death was occasioned * * * by the wilful intention of the employee to injure or kill * * * another.' For, even though the assault upon Zeigler, the employee, may have arisen out of and in the course of the employment, still the right to benefits is barred where the acts of the employee are such as to come within the legislative exception of wilful intent to injure.

The foregoing section constitutes an exception to the general principle that fault has no bearing upon an employee's right to recover Workmen's Compensation benefits, and finds application only in those cases where it is shown that the acts of the employee are so serious and aggravated as to evince a wilful intent to injure. It is a defense and the burden of establishing it rests upon the one asserting it. Section 72--158, 1962 Code of Laws.

We have held that the term 'wilful intention,' as used in the statute, means a deliberate or formed intention. Reeves v. Carolina Foundry & Machine Works, 194 S.C. 403, 9 S.E.2d 919.

The Commission has found that the employee's death was not occasioned by any wilful intent on his part to injure. We are bound by such finding on appeal if there is any evidence to support it. The issue becomes one of law however for the court to decide where the evidence gives rise to but one reasonable inference.

Both, Zeigler, the deceased, and Fender, his fellow employee, were employed as agents of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division which has its headquarters near Columbia, South Carolina. Deceased resided at headquarters where rooms were maintained for occupancy by some of the agents. Fender was at the time in question, and had been for several days prior thereto, in charge of headquarters and in such capacity had supervision over the assignment of personnel. One of the rules of the Division required that the officer in charge of headquarters have information at all times as to the whereabouts of the law enforcement agents.

On Saturday, June 20, 1964, about 4 p.m., deceased and Fender were together at headquarters and engaged in a heated argument concerning the alleged making of long distance calls and the inability of Fender to contact deceased on the two previous nights. The argument became so heated until a Lieutenant Faulk, who was present, stepped between them and told them to 'cool off.' They...