Superior Builders, Inc. v. Brown

DELAPLAINE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. On October 3, 1952, Carlin C. Matthews, of Baltimore, who was employed as a painter by Superior Builders, Inc., was injured by a fall from a ladder in the course of his employment and died on the same day as a result of his injuries. Claims for compensation were filed with the State Industrial Accident Commission by his sister, Missouri Brown, and her three infant children, and by his half-sister, Fairy Snow. At the hearing before the Commission, Mrs. Brown, a resident of Speedwell, Wythe County, Virginia, testified that her husband had deserted her about eight years previously, and that she wrote to Carlin C. Matthews, her brother, telling him that she was unable to support her children and that she would have to place them in a home.

She testified that her brother, wanting to help her to keep her children, offered to send money to her every week to provide for their support. She further testified that, in accordance with his promise, he sent to her during the entire period of eight years until the time of his death an average of about $25 a week, and that in addition he brought them clothing from time to time. ⁵⁴² Mrs. Brown was corroborated by Mrs. Margaret C. Woody, of Baltimore, former wife of Carlin C. Matthews. Mrs. Woody testified that when she lived with Matthews his salary averaged more than $80 a week, and that she mailed various amounts of money to Mrs. Brown. Mrs. Woody testified that the smallest amount which she ever sent for her husband was $18, but sometimes she sent as much as $35.

She estimated that the average amount per week which her husband gave for the support of Mrs. Brown’s children was $25. The Commission found that Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Snow were partially dependent upon the deceased employee, and that the three children were wholly dependent upon him. The Commission thereupon passed an order requiring Superior Builders, Inc., employer, and the State Accident Fund, insurer, to pay compensation to Mrs. Brown not to exceed $1,500, to Mrs. Snow not to exceed $500, and to the children not to exceed $5,000. The employer and the insurer and the claimants all appealed from the order of the Commission to the Court of Common Pleas of Baltimore City.

The case was tried in that Court before a jury on the record received from the Commission. On the first issue, whether Mrs. Brown was partially dependent for support upon the deceased employee at the time of his death, the jury answered “No.” On the second issue, whether Mrs. Snow was partially dependent upon him for support, the jury answered “No.” On the third issue, whether the three children were wholly dependent upon him for support, the jury answered “Yes.” The employer and the insurer filed a motion for a judgment n. o. v. or for a new trial, and the trial judge overruled that motion. Judgment was then entered reversing the order of the Commission as to Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Snow and affirming the order as to the children. Appeal was then taken by the employer and the insurer from the judgment affirming the order as to the children.

They contend that the evidence is conclusive that the ⁵⁴³ children were only partially dependent upon the deceased employee. By express provision of the Maryland Workmen’s Compensation Act, questions of dependency, in whole or in part, are determined by the State Industrial Accident Commission in accordance with the facts in each particular case existent at the time of the injury resulting in death of the employee. Code 1951, Art. 101, sec. 35(8) (d). It is a truism that a “total dependent” is one who has no means of his own to support himself.

Generally speaking, total dependency, within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, exists where a claimant subsists entirely upon the earnings of a deceased employee. However, in construing the Act, the courts do not demand that a claimant must show destitution to obtain an award as a total dependent. The Act should receive a practical construction, and should be so interpreted and construed as to