Woods v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 227 S.E.2d 376 (Ga. 1976). · Go Syfert
Search
Woods v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 227 S.E.2d 376 (Ga. 1976). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
48 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Allen v. King Plow Co. (gactapp, 1997-07-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978 2002 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Allen v. King Plow Co.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1997 · confidence medium
Even if the ALJ would have had jurisdiction of King Plow to decide the issues, it is clear that the issues of fact now sought to be litigated have not previously been adjudicated. “ ‘[E]stoppel by judgment applies as between the same parties upon any cause of action to matters which were directly decided in the former suit.’ [Cit.]” Woods v. Delta Air Lines, 237 Ga. 332, 333 ( 227 SE2d 376 ) (1976). 3.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Smith v. Milliken & Co.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1989 · confidence medium
For examples: proceedings in the court of ordinary, [cit.]; contested-election cases, [cit.]; proceedings against road defaulters, [cits.]; partition proceedings, [cit.]; condemnation proceedings, [cit.]; proceedings to validate bonds, [cit.]” Metropolitan at 672; Woods v. Delta Air Lines, 237 Ga. 332, 333 ( 227 SE2d 376 ) (1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) A. R. Hudson Realty, Inc. v. Hood
Ga. Ct. App. · 1979 · confidence medium
The threshold question is whether Hudson’s claim is barred by the doctrine of res judicata, as asserted by Mrs. Hood. "[Wjhile res judicata applies only as between the same parties and upon the same cause of action to matters which were actually in issue or which under the rules of law could have been put in issue, estoppel by judgment applies as between the same parties upon any cause of action to matters which were directly decided in the former suit.” Brown v. Brown, 212 Ga. 202, 204 ( 91 SE2d 495 ) (1956); Woods v. Delta Air Lines, 237 Ga. 332, 333 ( 227 SE2d 376 ) (1976); Code §§ 11…
examined Cited "see" McLean Trucking Co. v. Florence (4×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See Woods v. Delta Air Lines, 237 Ga. 332 ( 227 SE2d 376 ) (1976).
discussed Cited "see" Cynthia B. Gorin v. Elton S. Osborne, Jr., M.D. (2×)
11th Cir. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See Woods v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 237 Ga. 332 , 227 S.E.2d 376 (1976) (doctrines of res judicata and estoppel by judgment are applicable to awards of the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation on all questions of fact in matters in which it has jurisdiction); Seaboard Fire & Marine Ins.
examined Cited "see" Oxendine v. Elliott (3×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Ga. Ct. App. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
See Woods v. Delta Air Lines, 237 Ga. 332 , supra; Mimms v. Sisk Decorating Co., 156 Ga. App. 572, 574 (2) ( 275 SE2d 148 ). *432 Again we look to the evidence as to whether or not all or any of the questions involved in the bankruptcy court have been answered so as to bar this action.
WOODS
v.
DELTA AIR LINES, INC. Et Al.
31102.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jul 9, 1976.
227 S.E.2d 376
William R. Parker, for appellant., Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Edward E. Dorsey, Daryll Love, for appellees.
Undercofler.
Cited by 22 opinions  |  Published
Undercofler, Presiding Justice.

This is a certiorari to the Court of Appeals in Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Woods, 137 Ga. App. 693 (224 SE2d 763) (1976).

The essential facts are that the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation in a claim against Delta found the plaintiff to be totally disabled; thereafter the plaintiff brought the present action to recover upon Delta’s Family Care Disability and Service Plan; the trial court granted a partial summary judgment decreeing that plaintiff was totally disabled under the "Plan” because the award of the "Compensation Board”operated as res judicata or estoppel by judgment as to such fact.

The Court of Appeals reversed. It held that res judicata was not applicable here and that "estoppel Lj judgment, if applicable, is ineffective against” the Georgia constitutional right to trial by jury.

We vacate the Court of Appeals opinion but affirm its judgment of reversal for the reasons stated herein.

We hold that the doctrines of res judicata and estoppel by judgment are applicable to awards of the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation on all questions of fact in matters in which it has jurisdiction. See Code § 114-710; Jones v. American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., 48 Ga. App. 351, 353 (172 SE 600) (1933); Noles v. National Engine Rebuilding Co., 119 Ga. App. 833 (169 SE2d 185) (1969).

[*333] Argued June 15, 1976 Decided July 9, 1976 Rehearing denied July 22, 1976. William R. Parker, for appellant.

The Georgia constitutional right to trial by jury is not applicable to the proceedings of the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation. Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. of N. Y. v. Huhn, 165 Ga. 667, 671 (142 SE 121) (1927). Therefore, the denial of a jury trial does not render these doctrines of res judicata and estoppel by judgment as to facts ineffective. "... res judicata applies only as between the same parties and upon the same cause of action to matters which were actually in issue or which under the rules of law could have been put in issue, estoppel by judgment applies as between the same parties upon any cause of action to matters which were directly decided in the former suit.” Brown v. Brown, 212 Ga. 202, 204 (91 SE2d 495) (1956).

We agree with the Court of Appeals that the doctrine of res judicata is not applicable in the instant case because the cause of action on the "Plan” is different than the previous cause of action for workmen’s compensation.

We find also that the doctrine of estoppel by judgment does not apply. The "Compensation Board” found the plaintiff totally disabled under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. It did not decide directly, and in our opinion had no jurisdiction to decide, whether the plaintiff was totally disabled under Delta’s "Family Care Disability and Service Plan.”

Hayes v. Layton, 125 Ga. App. 433 (188 SE2d 149) (1972) is correct because the factual issue there had been previously decided directly by the "Compensation Board” in a matter in which it had jurisdiction. We note also that the award in Hayes had been affirmed by the superior court. "Such decree of the court shall have the same effect, and all proceedings in relation thereto shall, subject to the other provisions of this Title, thereafter be the same as though rendered in a suit heard and determined by said court.” Code § 114-710.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. [*334] Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Edward E. Dorsey, Daryll Love, for appellees.