Queen v. Champion Fibre Co.

Clarkson, J. The question involved in this cause: Where an employee has lost his life in the course of his employment and thereafter an award has been made by the Industrial Commission to his widow, as his sole dependent, and within a few months after the award is made his widow died intestate, is her administrator entitled to the benefits of the award as made to her ? We think so. In construing the many statutes on this subject the decisions of the different states are conflicting. It seems that there is no straight line on the subject. In this State the following statutes have some bearing: Section 40 of the Compensation Act reads as follows (chap. 120, Laws of 1929) : “If the deceased employee leaves no dependents, the employer shall pay to the personal representative of the deceased, the commuted amount provided for under section 38 of this act, less the burial expenses which shall be deducted therefrom.” Section 40 above, of the original act was amended by the 1931 General Assembly by striking out all of said section and adding in lieu thereof, the following (chap. 274, sec. 5) : “If the deceased employee leaves no dependents, the employer shall pay to the next of kin, as herein defined, the commuted amount provided for under section 38 of this act for whole dej>endents; but if the deceased left no next of kin, as herein defined then one-half of said commuted amount shall be paid to the Industrial Commission to be held and disbursed by it in the manner hereinafter provided; one-half of said commuted amount shall be retained by the Industrial Commission and the other one-half paid to the personal representative of the deceased, to be by him distributed to the next *97 of kin as defined in tbe statutes of distribution; but if there be no next of kin as defined in tbe statutes of distribution, then tbe personal representative shall pay tbe same to tbe Industrial Commission after payment of costs of administration,” etc. Section 38 of tbe original act, provides: “. . . that tbe employer shall pay ... in one of tbe methods hereinafter provided, to tbe dependents of tbe employee wholly dependent upon bis earnings for support, at tbe time of tbe accident, a weekly payment equal to sixty per centum of bis average weekly wages, but not more than - eighteen dollars nor less than seven dollars a week for a period of three hundred fifty weeks from tbe date of tbe injury,” etc. Tbe insurance carrier received a premium to cover tbe liability in question. J. Coleman Queen, lost bis life in tbe performance of duty and at tbe time an employee of tbe Champion Fibre Company. He left a widow, Roxanna Henson Queen, wholly dependent. Tbe Industrial Commission fixed tbe award that she should be paid. Tbe widow died a few months after tbe award bad been made to her. Plaintiff administrator of Roxanna Henson Queen, claims tbe balance of tbe award. Giving a liberal construction to tbe act, we think tbe administrator is entitled to it. We can see no reason why tbe Globe Indemnity Company, defendant, tbe insurer, is interested in tbe matter. With knowledge of tbe law it took tbe premium to carry tbe liability. Suppose tbe widow died an hour after her husband, would it have been conscionable, for tbe insurance carrier that bad received tbe premium, to pay no compensation? We think not. Tbe carrier is not hurt in this particular situation, now presented. We do not pass upon tbe question that might arise in cases where there are several dependents and there is death among them after tbe award is made. Tbe judgment below is Affirmed.