## Facts

- William Jackson Adams, a Texfi Industries employee, died in a plane crash in September 1990 while acting in the course of employment.
- Claimants sought workers’ compensation death benefits: the widow, a minor adopted daughter, and a minor stepdaughter.
- A hearing commissioner awarded benefits to all three claimants, applying the statutory presumption of whole dependency to the stepdaughter and apportioning benefits 50% to the widow, 25% to the adopted child, and 25% to the stepchild.
- The Workers’ Compensation Commission’s appellate panel ruled the stepchild was not entitled to the statutory presumption and reallocated benefits, leaving 50% to the widow and increasing the adopted child to 50%.
- The circuit court affirmed and also found substantial evidence the stepchild was not wholly dependent or even dependent on the decedent at death.
- The court of appeals affirmed.
- The South Carolina Supreme Court granted certiorari.

## Issues

1. Whether a stepchild may be considered a “child” under S.C. Code Ann. § 42-9-110 and thereby receive the statutory presumption of whole dependency for workers’ compensation death benefits.
2. Whether the court of appeals erred by requiring a stepchild to prove dependency as a threshold condition to qualify as a “child” for purposes of § 42-9-110.
3. Whether the record supported treating the stepchild as wholly dependent for death-benefit purposes.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals.
- The Court rejected the lower courts’ restrictive approach to the dependency showing required for a stepchild to qualify as a “child” under Title 42.
- The Court reinstated the Commission’s determination that the stepchild was wholly dependent and entitled to death benefits.

## Legal Principles

- Under S.C. Code Ann. § 42-9-110, once a claimant qualifies as a statutory “child,” the claimant is presumed wholly dependent for death-benefit purposes.
- A stepchild may fall within the statutory concept of “child” when the facts show a substantial, real reliance on the deceased employee for support.
- Courts may not nullify the statutory presumption by imposing an extra threshold requirement that a stepchild prove full dependency before being treated as a “child.”
- Workers’ compensation provisions concerning dependents are construed to protect those who were in fact supported by the employee, consistent with the statute’s remedial purpose.

## Conclusion

The South Carolina Supreme Court held that a minor stepchild can qualify as a “child” under § 42-9-110 based on the actual support relationship and, once within that category, is entitled to the presumption of whole dependency; the Court reversed the denial of benefits and reinstated the award to the stepchild.


Adams v. Texfi Indus., 320 S.C. 213, 464 S.E.2d 109 (S.C. 1995)