From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morgan, Jones and Gillis v. Elmore

Supreme Court of Mississippi
Apr 16, 1962
244 Miss. 36 (Miss. 1962)

Opinion

No. 42294.

April 16, 1962.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Grenada County; MARSHALL PERRY, J.

Brewer, Brewer Luckett, Clarksdale, for appellants.

I. The claim was settled by the lump sum settlement.

II. The claim was barred by the statute of limitations.

III. The claim was for a disability of the leg and not of the body as a whole.

IV. Clarence Elmore was paid all compensation to which he was entitled.

Collation of authorities: Armstrong Tire Rubber Co. v. Franks, 242 Miss. 792, 137 So.2d 141; Dixon v. Green, 240 Miss. 204, 127 So.2d 662; Nowlin v. Mississippi Chemical Co., 219 Miss. 873, 70 So.2d 48; Reed v. Martin, 215 Miss. 472, 61 So.2d 300; Dunn, Mississippi Workmen's Compensation, Sec. 211.

Charles C. Finch, Batesville; J.A. Travis, Jr., Jackson, for appellee.

I. The award of compensation disability benefits as made to the appellee herein by the Circuit Court of Grenada County, Mississippi, was correct in all respects since it affirms a finding of fact as made by the full Mississippi Workmen's Compensation Commission, which was supported by substantial evidence, except as to the Circuit Court's modification and disallowance of penalties under Section 6998-19(e) of the Mississippi Code of 1942, Anno., as amended. Boyd Constr. Co. v. Worthy, 234 Miss. 671, 107 So.2d 120; California Eastern Airways v. Neal, 228 Miss. 370, 87 So.2d 895; Capitol Broadcasting Co. v. Wilkerson, 240 Miss. 64, 126 So.2d 242; Cole v. Superior Coach Corp., 234 Miss. 287, 106 So.2d 71; Connell v. Armstrong Tire Rubber Co., 242 Miss. 280, 134 So.2d 435; Dowdle Pearson, Inc. v. Dependents of Hargrove, 222 Miss. 64, 75 So.2d 277; El Patio Motor Co., Inc. v. Dependents of Long, 242 Miss. 294, 134 So.2d 437; Fair Stores v. Bryant, 238 Miss. 434, 118 So.2d 295; Freeman v. Mississippi P. L. Co. 230 Miss. 396, 92 So.2d 658; Gaines v. McCormick, 238 Miss. 535, 117 So.2d 467; Grubbs v. Revell Furn. Co., 234 Miss. 319, 106 So.2d 390; Gulf Park College v. Wheeler, 237 Miss. 155, 113 So.2d 666; Hale v. General Box Co., 228 Miss. 394, 87 So.2d 679; Jackson Oil Products Co. v. Curtis, 241 Miss. 188, 129 So.2d 403; Malley v. Over The Top, Inc., 229 Miss. 347, 90 So.2d 678; Mississippi Products, Inc. v. Gordy, 224 Miss. 690, 80 So.2d 793; Railway Express Agency v. Hollingsworth, 221 Miss. 688, 74 So.2d 754; Russell v. Southeastern Utilities Service Co., 230 Miss. 272, 92 So.2d 544; Smith v. St. Catherine Gravel Co., 220 Miss. 462, 41 So.2d 221; Southern Engineering Electric Co. v. Chester, 226 Miss. 136, 83 So.2d 811; Tanner v. American Hardware Corp., 238 Miss. 612, 119 So.2d 380; Williams Bros. Co. v. McIntosh, 226 Miss. 553, 84 So.2d 692; Wilson Furn. Co. v. Wilson, 237 Miss. 512, 115 So.2d 141.

II. The Circuit Court of Grenada County, Mississippi was correct in holding that Section 6998-19(j) of the Mississippi Code of 1942, Anno., as amended has no application to the instant case. Busby v. Ingalls Shipbuilding Corp., 236 Miss. 870, 113 So.2d 126; Cumbest Mfg. Co. v. Pinkney, 225 Miss. 318, 83 So.2d 74, 84 So.2d 421; Dixon v. Green, 240 Miss. 204, 127 So.2d 662; T.C. Fuller Plywood Co. v. Moffett, 231 Miss. 382, 95 So.2d 475; Grubbs v. Revell Furn. Co., supra; Harris v. Suggs, 233 Miss. 523, 102 So.2d 696; Hudgins v. Marine Welding Repair Works, 237 Miss. 301, 114 So.2d 767; Maloney Constr. Co. v. Strickland, 237 Miss. 440, 114 So.2d 851; H.C. Moody Sons v. Dedeaux, 223 Miss. 832, 79 So.2d 225; James F. O'Neil, Inc. v. Livings, 232 Miss. 118, 92 So.2d 148; Shainberg's Black White Stores v. Prothro, 238 Miss. 444, 118 So.2d 862; Alexander Smith, Inc. v. Genette, 232 Miss. 166, 98 So.2d 455; Treehearn v. Grafe Auto, 232 Miss. 854, 100 So.2d 786; 99 C.J.S., Sec. 337 p. 1214; 101 C.J.S., Sec. 898 p. 316; Dunn, Mississippi Workmen's Compensation Law, Sec. 193.

III. The Circuit Court of Grenada County, Mississippi erred in disallowing penalties against the appellants herein as awarded by the full Mississippi Workmen's Compensation Commission. Armstrong Tire Rubber Co. v. Franks, 242 Miss. 792, 137 So.2d 141; Sec. 6998-19(e), Code 1942.


This is another workmen's compensation case in which the attorney-referee approved the claim and after an examination, the Commission allowed the compensation. It was appealed to the circuit court and was affirmed, except the circuit court disallowed the penalties awarded by the Commission. The main points raised in this case are thoroughly covered in Armstrong Tire and Rubber Company, et al. v. Franks, (Miss. 1962), 137 So.2d 141. The case is therefore affirmed both as to the appellant and cross-appellant.

Affirmed on both direct and cross appeals.

McGehee, C.J., and Arrington, Rodgers, and Jones, JJ., concur.


ON MOTION TO CORRECT JUDGMENT


The judgment of the circuit court, which in turn affirmed the Workmen's Compensation Commission, except as to penalties, was affirmed by this Court. A memorandum opinion made no specific reference to interest, but the judgment awarded appellee interest from the due date of each weekly installment of compensation until paid.

This motion by appellants to correct the judgment argues that, because the attorney referee's hearing on the claim was postponed by appellee until January 16, 1961, they are liable for interest only from that date. The criteria of liability for interest are different from those for statutory penalties. It has been held on many occasions that interest should be allowed on each weekly installment of the award at the rate of six per cent per annum from its due date until paid. M.T. Reed Construction Co. v. Martin, 215 Miss. 472, 478, 61 So.2d 300 (1952); J B Manufacturing Co. v. Cochran, 216 Miss. 336, 341, 62 So.2d 378 (1953); Goodnite v. Farm Equipment Co., 234 Miss. 342, 356, 103 So.2d 391 (1958); Central Electric Power Assn. v. Hicks, 236 Miss. 378, 394, 110 So.2d 351 (1959).

Goodnite in particular discusses the reasons for an award of interest. They are applicable here as well as in the numerous other cases applying the same rule. Hence appellants' motion to correct judgment is overruled. Appellee's motion to strike it is moot.

Motion to correct judgment overruled.

All Justices concur.


Summaries of

Morgan, Jones and Gillis v. Elmore

Supreme Court of Mississippi
Apr 16, 1962
244 Miss. 36 (Miss. 1962)
Case details for

Morgan, Jones and Gillis v. Elmore

Case Details

Full title:MORGAN, JONES AND GILLIS, et al. v. ELMORE

Court:Supreme Court of Mississippi

Date published: Apr 16, 1962

Citations

244 Miss. 36 (Miss. 1962)
139 So. 2d 856

Citing Cases

Sanborn v. Lewis and Clark Cty

The rule against collateral attack has developed in the law of judgments and its application in the law of…