Claim of Wiltse v. Village of Owego
Opinion of the Court
Claimant’s deceased husband was the chief of the fire department of the village of Owego, which carried insurance
The award appealed from was made upon the theory that the decedent and his dependent widow and child come within the purview of group 19 of subdivision 1 of section 3 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, which provides: “Any municipal corporation or other political subdivision of the State or an incorporated volunteer fire company which renders fire protection service on a contract basis may bring its volunteer firemen within the coverage of this chapter by appropriate action of the legislative or governing body of such municipal corporation or other political subdivision * * * but the benefits payable under this chapter shall be only so much as the regular benefits hereunder may exceed the benefits payable under section two hundred five of the General Municipal Law.” The county of Tioga adopted the plan of insurance provided by subdivision 3-a of section 50 by a resolution of its board of supervisors adopted on October 24, 1930. By a further
The board of supervisors by affirmative action has limited death benefits payable on account of the death of a volunteer fireman to those provided by section 205 of the General Municipal Law. The provisional inclusion of volunteer firemen under group 19 of subdivision 1 of section 3 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law was effected by chapter 384 of the Laws of 1935, effective April eleventh of that year, and the above resolution of the board of supervisors of the county limiting liability was enacted in December of the same year. The village of Owego has taken no action since the earlier mentioned resolution of October 24,1930. Thus this municipal corporation has not brought its volunteer firemen within the coverage of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, and the only death benefits which may be allowed are those provided in the General Municipal Law. The Industrial Board is without power to change and modify the resolution adopted by the county and village or the obligations of those municipalities. The award appealed from was made in violation of the statutes earlier mentioned and the resolutions adopted.
The award should be reversed and the claim dismissed, with costs against the State Industrial Board.
Bliss, Heffernan, Schenck and Foster, JJ., concur.
Award reversed and claim dismissed, with costs against the State Industrial Board.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.