United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Washington
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
1. Except where the workmen’s compensation act specifically creates a presumption of dependency in favor of named classes, the question of dependency is one of fact rather than of law. Under that act a boy under the age of eighteen or a girl under the age of eighteen is conclusively presumed to be wholly dependent for support upon a parent. The same presumption arises in favor of a child over the age specified who is shown to be physically or mentally incapacitated from earning a livelihood. Ga. D. 1920, p. 189, § 39(c). In the instant- case, the claimant being more than eighteen years of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Austin Bros. Bridge Co. v. WhitmireCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- Ocean Accident & Guaranty Corp. v. CouncilCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. CoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Brocco v. May Department Stores Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1932
- Smith v. Travelers Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
- Washington v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
- Travelers Insurance v. LayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.