16 S.E.2d 774 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1941
Since the award of compensation was supported by competent evidence an affirmance was demanded. As a dismissal of the appeal has the same legal effect as an affirmance of the award no harmful error is shown by the dismissal, and the judgment of the superior court dismissing the appeal is affirmed.
1. The evidence authorized a finding that there was a change in claimant's condition and that it was caused by the original injury. An affirmance of the award was for this reason demanded, and the fact that the appeal was dismissed rather than affirmed is immaterial since the same legal consequence resulted. It might be stated that the plaintiff in error in the main bill does not contend that the award was not supported by competent evidence.
2, 3. It is too late to raise the question that the original award was illegal because no notice was given to the city until more than thirty days after the injury. The original award is the law of the case, not having been set aside. The same is true as to the question whether the injury arose out of and in the course of employment.
4. There is no merit in the city's contention that the claimant could not proceed in his own name. The assistant superintendent of the sanitarium, in a letter, certified that the claimant was discharged from the hospital on December 30, 1936, in a normal mental condition. In view of this fact there was no presumption that he was still insane. Talley v. Beavers,
No error is shown in dismissing the appeal. The points made on the cross-bill have been abandoned by a request to dismiss the cross-bill, which is granted.
Judgment affirmed. Cross-bill dismissed. Stephens, P. J., andSutton, J., concur. *837