Negligent security cases can be very costly to defend and the damages can be steep. An insurer needs to know whether it has issued a policy that effectively excludes these types of losses. Negligent security cases can be very costly to defend and the damages can be steep. An insurer needs to know whether it has issued a policy that effectively excludes these types of losses. This can be difficult because Georgia Courts self-admittedly favor coverage for the insured if it can detect any ambiguity in the policy’s exclusions. Recently, in Hudson Specialty Ins. Co. v. Snappy Slappy, LLC, the Middle District of Georgia corrected a judgment because it had strained to find ... Continue Reading
Workers’ Compensation Claimants and Incarceration: Before, After, and Way After Conviction
Workers' compensation claims and injuries do not exist in a vacuum; they affect real people who often have real problems outside of their work injury. Workers’ compensation claims and injuries do not exist in a vacuum; they affect real people who often have real problems outside of their work injury. Often, claims professionals are called upon to interpret what an incarceration or conviction means to a claimant who is or could be receiving workers’ compensation benefits. Although the interplay between the workers’ compensation system and the criminal system is complicated, remembering a few general rules can help you make the right decisions. Innocent Until Proven Guilty If a workers’ ... Continue Reading
Last Injurious Exposure in Workers’ Compensation Asbestos Claims in Georgia
In Georgia, when an occupational disease claim is compensable under the Act, O.C.G.A §34-9-284 places sole liability on the employer and its' insurance carrier, if any, where the employee was last injuriously exposed to the hazards of the disease. The Act excludes any right of contribution from any prior employer or insurance carrier. In Georgia, when an occupational disease claim is compensable under the Act, O.C.G.A §34-9-284 places sole liability on the employer and its’ insurance carrier, if any, where the employee was last injuriously exposed to the hazards of the disease. The Act excludes any right of contribution from any prior employer or insurance carrier. In a very recent ... Continue Reading