(Download) "Miller v. Aetna Life Ins. Co." by Supreme Court of Montana * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Miller v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
• Author : Supreme Court of Montana
• Release Date : January 07, 1936
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 65 KB

Description

Workmens Compensation ? Duties of Industrial Accident Board ? Irregularity in Name of Employer Immaterial ? Directory Provisions of Act ? Acts of Agent of Insurer ? When Presumed Ratified by Principal. Workmens Compensation ? When Irregularity in Name of Employer Insufficient to Affect Right of Claimant. 1. Where a workman was injured while in the employ of a corporation operating a service station which had enrolled under the Workmens Compensation Act but under a name somewhat different from what it appeared at the time of the injury, the right of the claimant to compensation was not affected by irregularities in the name where it was sufficient to identify the place of business and his employer. Same ? Duty of Industrial Accident Board to See That Employer Properly Enrolled Under Act. 2. It is the duty of the Industrial Accident Board, where after a corporation has enrolled under the Workmens Compensation Act a successor takes over its business, to determine whether the latter is properly enrolled, and if not, see to it that notices displayed in its place of business that it is so enrolled are removed therefrom. Same ? Deposit of Insurance Policy With Industrial Accident Board Notice of What. 3. The fact of a deposit of an insurance policy by an insurance carrier with the Industrial Accident Board covering the employees of a corporation was sufficient notice to the board that a concern bearing its name or a similar name desired to enroll under the Workmens Compensation Act, and if the board had any doubt about the matter it was its duty to make the necessary investigation to remove the doubt. - Page 213 Same ? Compensation Act Enacted for Benefit of Employees ? Duty of Board in Administering Act. 4. The Workmens Compensation Act was enacted for the benefit of the employee, and the Act implies that the first duty of the Industrial Accident Board is to administer it so as to give the employee the greatest possible protection consistent with its purposes. Statutes and Statutory Construction ? Directory and Mandatory Provisions ? How Intent of Legislature Determined. 5. Whether a statutory provision is directory or mandatory depends upon the intention of the legislature, to be ascertained from a consideration of the object of the statute and the consequences that would result from construing it one way or the other. Workmens Compensation ? Certain Provisions of Act Held Directory. 6. The provisions of section 2979, Revised Codes 1921 (Workmens Compensation Act), prescribing the acts an employer electing to become subject to plan No. 2 must do, such as filing a written acceptance of its provisions with the board, the filing of policy, etc., held directory, not mandatory, having nothing to do with the contract of the insurer imposing a liability running directly to the injured employee, and failure to perform them does not inure to the benefit of the insurer. Same ? Collection of Insurance Premium by Agent of Insurer ? Failure of Insurer to Question Act of Agent ? Ratification of Agents Act by Principal ? Presumption. 7. Where an insurance carrier under the Workmens Compensation Act collected the insurance premium from an employer incident to the risk assumed in insuring his employees under the Act, and after a claim for injuries sustained had been filed the carrier neither at the hearing before the Industrial Accident Board nor in the district court on appeal raised the point that the agent was unauthorized to act, and never repudiated what he had done, the presumption is that his act was ratified by his principal.

Download Free Books "Miller v. Aetna Life Ins. Co." PDF ePub Kindle