Drew Eckl Farnham Journal image

Supreme Court of Georgia Oral Arguments

February 19, 2019 BY Def Admin | Appellate

Steve Miller, serving as counsel for Milliken & Company, urge the high court to reverse the Court of Appeals decision, arguing that it "overrides the plain language of Georgia's antiindemnity statute," Georgia Code ยง 13-8-2 (b). That statute prohibits only indemnity agreements "1) where the injury is caused by or resulting from the 'sole negligence' of the indemnitee," which in this case would be Milliken, and "2) that relate to the construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of a building structure, appurtenance, or appliance." ... Continue Reading

Willful Misconduct: Practical Considerations for Employers

February 06, 2017 BY Def Admin | Workers Compensation

The willful misconduct defense is one that is notoriously difficult to successfully assert, but there are a few actions that an employer can and must take before an accident even occurs in order to protect an employer/insurer's ability to assert this defense in a claim involving employee misconduct. ... Continue Reading

We Can All Learn A Little Something from Strippers: The Basic Analysis Distinguishing Employees from Independent Contractors

February 06, 2017 BY Def Admin | Workers Compensation

It can be to a business's advantage to work with independent contractors, as this may lessen their liability under the Act, but there are risks associated with misclassifying workers. If a business misclassifies an employee as an independent contractor and that employee has a compensable work-related injury, the Employer and Insurer can likely face back indemnity benefits, back medical benefits, attorney fees, and penalties. ... Continue Reading

The Paradox of Approaches: They Extend Further Than You Think

August 02, 2016 BY Def Admin | General Liability

Georgia courts have gradually increased what constitutes an approach, and the Georgia Court of Appeals' recent decision in Six Flags Over Georgia II, L.P. v. Martin, 335 Ga. App. 350 (2015) exponentially expanded how far an approach extends. ... Continue Reading

The Conflicting Obligations of Time Limit Demands and Court Approval for Settlements Involving Minors

March 31, 2016 BY Def Admin | General Liability

Imagine the following scenario. Your insured is involved in a car accident in which he injures a minor. Your insured is at fault and he has a $50,000 automobile insurance policy, but the minor's medical bills are more than your insured's $50,000 automobile policy limit. After filing a lawsuit, the plaintiff attorney sends you a valid time-limit demand on behalf of his minor client, demanding your insured's policy limits of $50,000. You know that, because the proposed gross settlement amount is more than $15,000, the settlement must be submitted for approval to the court in which the action is pending. ... Continue Reading

The Journal is a publication for the clients of Drew Eckl & Farnham, LLP. It is written in a general format and is not intended to be legal advice to any specific circumstance. Legal Opinions may vary when based upon subtle factual differences. All rights reserved. 

Editorial Board:

H. Michael Bagley

Page 1 of 22