Opinion
18175.
ARGUED MAY 11, 1953.
DECIDED JULY 13, 1953.
Certiorari to Court of Appeals.
Martin, Snow Grant, for plaintiffs in error.
Emory L. Rowland, Harry E. Monroe, T. Elton Drake and John M. Williams, contra.
1. Within two years from the date the State Board of Workmen's Compensation is "notified" of the final payment of an award of compensation, the board may review the award or settlement on the ground of a change in condition, and make an award ending, diminishing, or increasing the compensation previously awarded. Code § 114-709, as amended by Ga. L. 1937, p. 534, and Ga. L. 1943, pp. 167-170 (Code, Ann. Supp., § 114-709).
2. The chairman of the board was told by counsel for the defendants that counsel had "made a settlement of $1300 to" counsel for the employee. Under the facts of this case, the chairman (and the board) were "notified" by the statement of counsel that payment had been made pursuant to the written contract.
3. The application for review was not filed within two years from the date the board was "notified" of payment of the lump sum agreed upon, and approved by the board. The Court of Appeals therefore erred in reversing the judgment rendered by the judge of the superior court.
No. 18175. ARGUED MAY 11, 1953 — DECIDED JULY 13, 1953.
The agreement for a lump-sum payment between the parties, and the approval by the State Board of Workmen's Compensation (omitting some formal parts), were as follows:
"Whereas, on May 10, 1949, an award was rendered in favor of the employee, which award was later reviewed and upheld by the Full Board and,
"Whereas, an appeal from said award is now pending in the Superior Court of Pulaski County, Georgia, and
"Whereas, the employee has fully recovered from injuries sustained by him which were the basis for his claim for compensation, and has furnished a certificate from Dr. A. T. Coleman showing that he is capable of returning to work, and that his recovery is complete, and
"Whereas, it is the desire of all parties to settle this pending litigation,
"Now Therefore, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows:
"1. Said appeal now pending in the Superior Court of Pulaski County shall be dismissed.
"2. The National Surety Corporation will pay to J. W. Orvin the sum of $1300.00 and it is agreed that said amount represents the entire amount due under the award rendered by the Board, and that the said employee has no further claims of any kind or character.
"3. That the Board of Workmen's Compensation shall enter an award approving this stipulation and agreement.
"In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have hereunto affixed our hands and seals, this 13 day of August, 1949.
J. W. Orvin
Emory Rowland, Attorney for J. W. Orvin
T. D. Lamb Construction Company and
National Surety Corporation
By: T. Baldwin Martin
Their Attorney at Law
"It appearing to the Board that said stipulation conforms with the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act of Georgia, the same is hereby approved.
"Award.
"Wherefore, based upon the above and foregoing agreements entered into by and between the parties, T. D. Lamb Construction Company, employer, and/or National Surety Corporation, insurance carrier, are hereby authorized and directed to pay, upon receipt of this order, direct to J. W. Orvin, employee claimant, $1300.00, in lump sum in full and final settlement of all compensation due hereunder. And it is so ordered.
"Director W. E. Buckner concurs. Director Lawton W. Griffin absent on official business. This the 16th day of August, 1949.
State Board of Workmen's Compensation
Arlie D. Tucker
ADT/1d Arlie D. Tucker, Chairman and Director."
With reference to whether or not the board was notified of payment of the lump sum, pursuant to the written contract approved by the board, the following occurred during the examination of Mr. Tucker, chairman of the board, by counsel for the defendants: "Q. Pursuant to that an award was rendered based on the settlement agreement which was signed by both parties I believe on August 16th. Anyhow, it's in the record, you recall that? A. I do. Q. And on August 18, you remember you were in Macon holding hearings and I appeared in the case of Smith vs. Grantham — A. Yes. Q. And at that time I had that case [Orvin case] very much on my mind and told you that I already made a settlement of thirteen hundred dollars to Emory Rowland? A. Yes."
The judge of the superior court reversed the finding by the board that notice had not been given. The Court of Appeals reversed this judgment, and the case comes to this court on certiorari.
In all instances where an agreement is made for the payment of compensation in a lump sum, the agreement must be approved by the Board of Workmen's Compensation, and, where the agreement is not so approved, "it is contrary to public policy, is not binding upon the parties, and is void." Tillman v. Moody, 181 Ga. 530, 534 ( 182 S.E. 906). In the present case the board approved the agreement and directed that the defendants "pay upon receipt of this order, direct to J. W. Orvin, employee claimant, $1300.00, in lump sum in full and final settlement of all compensation hereunder."
We recognize that the word "settlement" has many different meanings. As used by counsel to the chairman of the board in this case, settlement means "payment in full." 2 Bouvier's Law Dictionary, p. 3054; Webster's Unabridged Dictionary (2d ed.), p. 2293, div. 7 under "settlement." The statement of counsel for the defendants to the chairman of the board (which was duly admitted by the chairman), subsequent to the order of the board approving the agreement, was: "I already made a settlement of thirteen hundred dollars to Emory Rowland [counsel for the claimant]." This statement of counsel, under the facts of this case, could only mean payment in full.
A liquidated demand is "an amount certain and fixed, either by the act and agreement of the parties, or by operation of law." Nisbet v. Lawson, 1 Ga. 275, 287. A settlement "to" opposing counsel should not have been understood by the chairman of the board to mean that the claimant's demand had become fixed and certain by a settlement of $1300 "to" opposing counsel. Under the law the amount the claimant would receive had been determined by the act of the board in approving the agreement between the parties.
The State Board of Workmen's Compensation is an administrative commission, with such jurisdiction, powers, and authority as may be conferred upon it by the General Assembly. Gravitt v. Georgia Casualty Co., 158 Ga. 613, 618 ( 123 S.E. 897). The General Assembly has not conferred upon the State Board of Workmen's Compensation, or the chairman thereof, any authority to limit or restrict the generally approved and accepted meaning of words, phrases, and clauses of the English language. Any construction by the chairman that he did not, in fact, have notice that $1300 had been paid to counsel for the claimant, pursuant to the agreement, is not binding upon the courts.
Since there is no statute, or rule of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation, requiring notice of payments to claimants to be in writing, the fact that it may have been a custom of the board to accept a written notice would not preclude an oral notice.
Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, J., who dissents, and Atkinson, P. J., not participating.