Williams v. Industrial Acc. Board Williams v. Industrial Acc. Board

Williams v. Industrial Acc. Board

109 MONT. 235, 97 P.2D 1115, 1939.MT.0000093

    • $0.99
    • $0.99

Publisher Description

Workmens Compensation ? Lump Sum Settlements ? Power of Industrial Accident Board ? Trust Relationship with Claimants and Public ? Discretion ? Final Settlement ? Reopening Case ? Denial of Motion Held not Error. Workmens Compensation Act ? Power of Industrial Accident Board to Make Lump Sum Settlements. 1. Though it evidently was the intention of the legislature in enacting the Workmens Compensation Act that monthly payments should be the rule and lump sum settlements the exception, under section 2926, Revised Codes, the Industrial Accident Board is authorized to make such latter settlements. Same ? Industrial Accident Board Occupies Position of Trust to Claimants and Public. 2. The Industrial Accident Board in administering the Workmens Compensation Act occupies a position of trust not only to claimants but to the public in general inasmuch as the fundamental basis of the law is that the economic loss caused by industrial accidents shall not necessarily rest upon the public but that industry shall, in the first instance, pay for the accident. Same ? Industrial Accident Board Must Act in Good Faith and Fairness ? Discretion. 3. In dealing with an application for a lump sum settlement by a claimant under the Workmens Compensation Act, the Industrial Accident Board should show a very high degree of good faith, impartiality and fairness; determination of the application requires the exercise of a sound discretion, and its power in that behalf must be exercised in conformity with the spirit of the law and so as to best promote the ends of justice. Same ? Reopening of Claim After Final Settlement ? Refusal of Motion Held not Error. 4. In 1931 the Industrial Accident Board, after a careful investigation of the facts relative to an industrial accident suffered by claimant and affording him full opportunity to present the facts relative to his injury, made a lump sum settlement with him. In 1935 his attorney requested that the case be reopened on the ground that all the injuries growing out of the accident had not been considered. The board refused the request and the district court on appeal - Page 236 dismissed claimants appeal from the boards order. Held, that in the absence of a showing of fraud on the part of the board, the board under section 2952, Revised Codes, was powerless to reopen the case after expiration of two years from the date of the lump sum settlement. Same ? Industrial Accident Board ? Board Creature of Statute ? Powers. 5. The Industrial Accident Board is a creature of the statute (Workmens Compensation Act), and, as such, any and all its authority comes from that statute, and its power to act is subject to the limitations thereof.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1939
November 1
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
12
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SELLER
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
SIZE
64.1
KB

More Books by Supreme Court of Montana

Bills v. Hannah Bills v. Hannah
1988
Poppleton v. Rollins Poppleton v. Rollins
1987
Boehm v. Alanon Club Boehm v. Alanon Club
1986
Mittelstadt v. Buckingham Mittelstadt v. Buckingham
1971
May v. First National Pawn Brokers May v. First National Pawn Brokers
1995
Custody and Parental Rights of F.m. Custody and Parental Rights of F.m.
1991