Drew Eckl & Farnham is happy to announce it is celebrating its 40th anniversary. Since its founding on February 14, 1983, Drew Eckl has been a pillar of the legal community in Georgia and beyond. Having started with only 22 attorneys laying the foundation, the firm has grown exponentially to nearly 100 attorneys and 100 staff members providing top quality legal services. Drew Eckl has also expanded is services across the state of Georgia, adding three new offices outside of its headquarters in Atlanta. The former Brunswick office opened on May 15, 1998, as the firm’s first expansion office, and it is now located in St. Simons Island, GA. Since then, Drew Eckl has opened two ... Continue Reading
City of Atlanta Adds New Protection for Gender Expression and Prohibits Discrimination Based on Criminal History
ATLANTA, December 8, 2022 — The City of Atlanta recently amended its existing anti-discrimination law to include protections based on both gender identity and the criminal history of job applicants and employees. Under existing city law, individuals who believe that they have been subject to employment discrimination can file complaints with the Atlanta Human Relations Commission. With this new amendment, the city added gender expression and criminal history as additional protected characteristics that could give rise to such a complaint. The amended ordinance still allows employers to make adverse employment decisions based on criminal history status if the criminal history is ... Continue Reading
Derivative Defamation: The Application of Respondeat Superior to Slander Claims
It is a well-known principal of Georgia law that an employer can be held vicariously liable for injuries to another proximately resulting from the acts of an employee committed within the scope of his or her employment pursuant to the doctrine of respondeat superior. O.C.G.A. § 51-2-2. In order for an employer to be held liable for an employee’s actions under respondeat superior, the employee must (1) be in furtherance of the employer’s business, and he or she must (2) be acting within the scope of his employer’s business. Piedmont Hosp. v. Palladino, 276 Ga. 612, 613 (2003). However, this general principal ... Continue Reading
Avoiding Common Pitfalls and Preserving Defenses in the Event of Application Misrepresentation
When faced with evidence that an insured misrepresented material facts on an application for insurance, the stakes are high: taking the position that a policy is void ab initio and provides no coverage for a loss usually results in litigation. Insurance carriers are wise to ensure that the case is strong before proceeding down the path of rescission. This article provides guidance on which ducks to align, attractive pitfalls to avoid when building a case for rescission, and recent decisions discussing these topics. Under Georgia law, a statement made in an insurance application must be one of the ... Continue Reading
Last Will and Testament
Have you wondered what the difference between a Last Will and Testament and a Trust (Revocable orIrrevocable) is, and if one is better than the other? We get this question frequently, and the answer is that itdepends on your situation and your goals.Last Will and TestamentA Last Will and Testament is a document you create during your lifetime that directs where your assets thatare subject to probate (the formal process of having your assets distributed through the court system) willgo at your death. Your Will is only effective at your death; it does not have any power if you areincapacitated but still alive. A Will does not avoid probate, but rather makes sure that your assets go to ... Continue Reading
BEWARE THE OTHER MAILBOX RULE
Imagine this scenario if you will: opposing counsel has blown their thirty (30) day deadline, pursuant to Georgia’s Uniform Superior Court Rule 6.2, to serve a response to your dispositive motion. Cheers to you! Is it now time to notify the court of opposing counsel’s inexplicable and egregious failure to timely respond to your dispositive motion? Unfortunately, thanks to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-6(e), the answer is no. O.C.G.A. § 9-11-6(e) states, in pertinent part, Whenever a party has the right or is required to do some act or take some proceedings within a prescribed period after the service of a notice or other paper, other than process, upon him or her, and the notice or paper is served ... Continue Reading
August Journal 2022
JOURNAL VOLUME 34 NO. 200 The Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor and its Application to Personal Injury Cases Even those with a cursory knowledge of the legal system understand that evidence is crucial to any case. But what most people do not know is that the absence of evidence can be just as important. O.C.G.A § 24-14-9 provides that “[i]n arriving at a verdict, the jury, from facts provide, and sometimes from the absence of counter evidence, may infer the existence of other facts reasonably and logically consequent on those proved.” (Emphasis added). One particular application of this principle is the Georgia doctrine of “res ipsa loquitur,” meaning “the thing speaks for ... Continue Reading
WC-240 Overview: A Step-by-Step Guide to the Light-Duty Job Process
Unlike articles that require scrolling through pages of advertisements before getting to the three easy steps to completing a home improvement project, the three-step WC-240 process— the statutory process to offer a claimant a light-duty job—will be explained. We will then discuss the impact of attempting (or not attempting) the job, an outline of the hearing regarding a claimant’s refusal to perform the light-duty job, and the benefits of using the light-duty job process. The Three-Step Guide Georgia statutes and Board Rules require the following three steps to be taken to offer a claimant a light-duty job. See O.C.G.A. 34-9-240; Board Rule 240. First, the ... Continue Reading
The Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor and its Application to Personal Injury Cases
Even those with a cursory knowledge of the legal system understand that evidence is crucial to any case. But what most people do not know is that the absence of evidence can be just as important. O.C.G.A § 24-14-9 provides that “[i]n arriving at a verdict, the jury, from facts provided, and sometimes from the absence of counter evidence, may infer the existence of other facts reasonably and logically consequent on those proved.” (Emphasis added). One particular application of this principle is the Georgia doctrine of “res ipsa loquitur,” meaning “the thing speaks for itself.” “Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence to be applied in cases where there is no evidence of ... Continue Reading
The Unilateral Suspension of Benefits in Workers’ Compensation – A Refresher on the All-Important Role of the “Return to Baseline” Opinion from the Authorized Treating Physician
Following an employer’s commencement of weekly benefits to a claimant in connection with a “compensable” work injury, the Workers’ Compensation Act describes some of the limited scenarios which permit the employer to subsequently and unilaterally suspend such benefits without a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. Collectively, O.C.G.A. § 34-9-221, O.C.G.A. § 34-9-240, and Board Rule 221 list the more common justifications for the unilateral suspension of such benefits, which include: (1) an actual return to work, (2) an opinion from the Authorized Treating Physician releasing the claimant to regular duty, or (3) the claimant’s unjustified refusal of suitable, limited duty ... Continue Reading