## Facts

- James Tarver, a Spalding County deputy sheriff, died in the course of employment, triggering competing claims for workers’ compensation dependency benefits.
- James and Mary Tarver were ceremonially married on November 17, 1963, and divorced on September 17, 1964.
- Nine days later, on September 26, 1964, James entered a ceremonial marriage with Patricia Jo Tarver.
- Barry Tarver, James’s minor son, was born April 3, 1966, to Mary and James.
- James later married Revia Tarver in January 1976 and divorced her on April 26, 1979; Revia nonetheless claimed benefits as James’s common-law wife at the time of death.
- Mary, as guardian for Barry, presented testimony that she and James entered a common-law marriage during the nine-day period between their 1964 divorce and James’s 1964 ceremonial marriage to Patricia Jo, including evidence of cohabitation and holding themselves out as married.
- The administrative law judge found a valid post-divorce common-law marriage between James and Mary, concluded it was never dissolved by divorce, treated subsequent marriages as invalid, awarded benefits to Barry, and denied Revia’s claim.
- The State Board of Workers’ Compensation adopted and affirmed the award with minor modifications.
- The superior court reversed, finding no evidence to support the Board’s finding of a common-law marriage, and remanded.
- The employer/insurer and Revia appealed; the Tarver claimants cross-appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether, under the “any evidence” standard, the superior court erred by overturning the Board’s finding that James and Mary entered a valid common-law marriage after their 1964 divorce and before James’s later ceremonial marriage.
2. If that common-law marriage existed and was never dissolved, whether James’s subsequent purported marriages were invalid for dependency purposes, thereby defeating Revia’s spousal claim and supporting Barry’s dependency benefits.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed the superior court.
- The court held that there was evidence supporting the Board’s finding of a common-law marriage between James and Mary during the post-divorce, pre-remarriage interval.
- Applying deferential review, the court reinstated the Board’s award granting dependency benefits to Barry and denying Revia’s claim as an alleged surviving spouse.

## Legal Principles

- In workers’ compensation appeals, factual findings by the Board are binding on reviewing courts if supported by any evidence; courts may not reweigh evidence or substitute their judgment for the Board’s.
- A common-law marriage (as recognized at the time) may be established by evidence of an agreement to be husband and wife, cohabitation, and holding out to the community as married.
- A valid marriage continues until dissolved by death or divorce; an undissolved marriage renders later attempted marriages void, which can determine spousal status for workers’ compensation dependency benefits.

## Conclusion

The appellate court reinstated the Board’s dependency award because evidence supported the Board’s finding that James and Mary formed a valid, undissolved common-law marriage, making later attempted marriages ineffective and defeating Revia’s claimed status as surviving spouse while leaving Barry entitled to benefits as a minor child.


Spalding Cnty. Comm’rs v. Tarver, 167 Ga. App. 661, 307 S.E.2d 58 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)