Impeachment of a witness is the process by which the laws of evidence allow the attorney to call into question the credibility of a person who is testifying at a trial. Impeachment of a witness is the process by which the laws of evidence allow the attorney to call into question the credibility of a person who is testifying at a trial. There are several ways to impeach a witness, which include: 1) showing that the witness is biased for or against a certain party, 2) showing that the witness has made prior inconsistent statements, 3) showing that the witness had a physical or mental limitation, and therefore could not have accurately ... Continue Reading
United Grocery Outlet V. Bennett: Clarifying The “Change In Condition” Statute Of Limitations
The "change in condition" statute of limitations contained in O.C.G.A. § 34-9-104(b) has historically been one of the more confusing provisions of Georgia's Workers' Compensation Act. The “change in condition” statute of limitations contained in O.C.G.A. § 34-9-104(b) has historically been one of the more confusing provisions of Georgia’s Workers’ Compensation Act. And when it comes to the law, confusion breeds litigation. The Georgia Court of Appeals recently took another step towards clarifying this provision in United Grocery Outlet v. ... Continue Reading
Journal Celebrates 20 Years
This newsletter has been published faithfully and uninterrupted every other month for the past 20 years. This newsletter has been published faithfully and uninterrupted every other month for the past 20 years. The JOURNAL is symbolic of not only Drew, Eckl & Farnham’s stability and long term presence in the community, but also our consistent and unrelenting efforts over many years to provide our clients with complete personal service by keeping them informed and abreast of important issues. Over the last two decades, more than a thousand articles have ... Continue Reading
Excuses, Excuses: What Constitutes A Proper Case To Open Default After Bellsouth V. Future Communications?V
A Georgia defendant is "in default" after failure to file a required answer within 30 days or failure to answer an amended complaint when ordered to do so by the Court. A Georgia defendant is “in default” after failure to file a required answer within 30 days or failure to answer an amended complaint when ordered to do so by the Court. After the case has been in default for fifteen days the Court may enter default judgment, at which point the Defendant effectively loses its opportunity to defend the case on the merits: the allegations of the complaint are deemed admitted and the Court will only hear evidence regarding ... Continue Reading
Department Of Insurance Changes To Suit Limitations Periods Cannot Be Applied Retroactively
On April 21, 2008, United States District Court Judge Orinda D. Evans held that the emergency regulations issued and subsequently adopted by the Georgia Insurance Commissioner's Office... On April 21, 2008, United States District Court Judge Orinda D. Evans held that the emergency regulations issued and subsequently adopted by the Georgia Insurance Commissioner’s Office (hereinafter “the Commissioner”) in 2006, which changed the suit limitation for certain property insurance policies to two years, cannot be applied retrospectively to extend the suit limitations period for losses filed under policies written or renewed prior to the ... Continue Reading
Can An Employee Bring A Federal Rico Claim Against Employer And Insurer In Relation To A Workers’ Compensation Claim? Landmark Decision Says Yes.
A Sixth Circuit Court recently came to a decision that will have a considerable impact across the country for workers' compensation carriers. A Sixth Circuit Court recently came to a decision that will have a considerable impact across the country for workers’ compensation carriers. The Court in Brown, et. al. v. Cassens Transport Co., et. al., 2008 WL 4658643 (6th Cir.) ruled that a group of employees’ Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) claim could proceed against an employer, claims adjuster, and doctor (“Defendants”) who allegedly engaged in mail and wire fraud ... Continue Reading
Timely Paid, But To The Wrong Person: An Employer’s Obligation When A Claimant’s Ttd Check Is Stolen
As undoubtedly any self-insured employer or workers' compensation insurance carrier knows, the golden rule when paying workers' compensation benefits pursuant to an award is: "20 days in-state and 17 days out of state." As undoubtedly any self-insured employer or workers’ compensation insurance carrier knows, the golden rule when paying workers’ compensation benefits pursuant to an award is: “20 days in-state and 17 days out of state.” After an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) issues an award calling for the payment of income benefits, the Employer/Insurer has 20 days from the date the award was issued to ... Continue Reading
The Doctrine Of Continuous Employment: Still Confusing After All These Years
Perhaps one of the more confusing issues that arise in workers' compensation claims involves the doctrine of "continuous employment."Perhaps one of the more confusing issues that arise in workers’ compensation claims involves the doctrine of “continuous employment.” Under this doctrine, if an employee who travels is injured while in “continuous employment” for his employer, those injuries are deemed compensable because the scope of employment of a traveling employee is deemed wider than that of an ordinary employee. New Amsterdam Casualty Co., v. Sumrell, 30 Ga. App. 682, 118 S.E. 786 (1923). Obviously, determining whether an employee ... Continue Reading
No Midnight Train To Georgia: Legal Defenses And Practical Solutions To Claimant’s Request To Depose An Out-Of-State Adjuster
Partly thanks to the benefit of technological advances, it is now common for adjusters to handle workers' compensation claims from separate parts of the country.Partly thanks to the benefit of technological advances, it is now common for adjusters to handle workers’ compensation claims from separate parts of the country. A Georgia claim might be handled by an adjuster outside of Atlanta, or by an adjuster working out of Lexington, Kentucky or Fargo, North Dakota. In such claims handled by an adjuster outside of Georgia, an issue arises when an obstinate claimant’s counsel pushes for the deposition of the out-of-state adjuster to be held in ... Continue Reading
A Global Offer Of Settlement From One Plaintiff To Multiple Defendants: Take It Or Leave It?
With the enactment of Senate Bill 3 by the Georgia General Assembly on February 15, 2005, for the first time under Georgia law, an "offer of settlement" rule was created. With the enactment of Senate Bill 3 by the Georgia General Assembly on February 15, 2005, for the first time under Georgia law, an “offer of settlement” rule was created. The initial version of the law was quickly declared unconstitutional, and the General Assembly responded the following year be enacting House Bill 239. As a result, the constitutional issues were addressed and Georgia’s offer of settlement rule was reinstated. The effect ... Continue Reading