Court Opinion

ID: 9633201
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:38:01.980769+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:08:30.565150
License: Public Domain

HOLOHAN, Justice
(dissenting).
The decision by the majority overrules this Court’s holding in Southern Pacific Co. v. Industrial Commission, 54 Ariz. 1, 91 P.2d 700 (1939) which has been the law in this State for over 30 years.
During that entire period the Legislature has never seen fit to change the law as announced in the cited case until the current year with the passage of the so-called “no fault” divorce statute.
In substance the Court in Southern Pacific Co. v. Industrial Commission, supra, held that physical incompetency at the time of marriage is not a ground for annulment but of divorce only. While the majority take the position that the better view is that any grounds rendering the marriage void or voidable should be available to grant an annulment of marriage even if such ground is also a statutory ground for divorce, this view appears contrary to the *76public policy of this State as set forth in the statutes. As this Court pointed out over 30 years ago, it was the evident intention of the Legislature that physical incompetency at the time of marriage be a ground for divorce and not annulment. The legislative history of inaction to change in any way the decision of the Court reinforces our belief that this Court’s construction of the legislative intent was correct. If there was to be a change in the law, it should be by legislative enactment and not by judicial construction. The award of the Industrial Commission of Arizona denying compensation to the petitioner should be affirmed.
STRUCKMEYER, J., concurs in the foregoing dissent of Justice HOLOHAN.