November 24, 2014

What About Expenses in a Georgia Workers' Compensation Claim?

Naturally, being unable to work is going to place you in a financial bind while your injury is healing. Expenses can add up. In Georgia, some of these expenses may be covered by the Employer/Insurer. Others may not be covered, so it is good to know just what expenses might be reimbursed to you.

expenses.jpgIf you drive or ride in a personal vehicle to and from your doctor's appointments, the mileage will be reimbursed to you at the rate of 56.5 cents per mile. If you take public transportation those expenses may be reimbursed. Expenses for taxis to and from medical appointments may also be reimbursed. In certain situations, meals and lodging may be reimbursed to you. For example, if your medical appointments take you away from home and require you to spend the night in a motel this may be an expense that will be reimbursed. These expenses are covered only if they are deemed necessary and appropriate in order for you to receive quality medical care.

In situations where expenses may be reimbursed, it is important for you to be a good record keeper. Save receipts and keep a log of your odometer readings with the dates that you traveled. Without receipts and good records, you most likely will not be reimbursed by the employer/insurer. It is very important that you submit documentation of your approved expenses within a year's time of incurring the expenses. Otherwise, your right to reimbursement is lost.

Continue reading "What About Expenses in a Georgia Workers' Compensation Claim?" »

November 21, 2014

Medical Treatment in a Georgia Workers' Compensation Claim

In Georgia, employees who are injured on the job are entitled to Workers' Compensation medical benefits. These benefits include medical treatment that is necessary to cure you, provide pain relief, or restore your health so that you can return to suitable employment.

medical-treatment.jpgOne of the issues that every injured worker faces in their Georgia Workers' Compensation claim revolves around medical treatment. After an authorized treating physician has been assigned to the claim, it is very import for the injured worker to be involved in their treatment and to follow the advice of their medical providers.

Georgia law requires that an injured worker cooperate with their doctors and therapists when at all possible. While recommended surgery may be rejected without fear of compromising the claim, failing to follow the doctor's advice can have a negative effect on the claim. It is especially important to keep appointments and to follow up with medical providers on the schedule that they recommend. But, what happens when the injured worker is not satisfied with their medical treatment?

Continue reading "Medical Treatment in a Georgia Workers' Compensation Claim" »

November 20, 2014

Benavides v. Eastern N.M. Med. Ctr. - "Wet Floor" Sign Absence Results in Higher Award

Every state has varying rules when it comes to workers' compensation law, but most provide that workers' compensation is a no-fault system and employers generally cannot face negligence litigation. cautionwetfloor.jpg

That means workers don't have to prove negligence in order to collect benefits, but neither can they sue the employer for negligent acts or omissions resulting in injury.

However, there are sometimes penalties for companies that fail to adhere to relevant state, federal and industry safety codes. These can come in the form of fines from the Occupational Safety & Health Administration. In New Mexico, it can result in a 10 percent higher amount of workers' compensation benefits paid to injured workers.

That was the issue argued in Benavides v. Eastern N.M. Med. Ctr., where an injured nurse argued that lack of a "wet sign" floor in the slick hallway of a hospital where she work constituted lack of a safety device.

Continue reading "Benavides v. Eastern N.M. Med. Ctr. - "Wet Floor" Sign Absence Results in Higher Award" »

November 11, 2014

Trezza v. USA Truck Inc. - Injury Not Compensable Minutes After "Logout"

In order for injuries to be compensable under worker's compensation law, they either need to occur while working or "arise out of the scope and course of employment."
For most who work at stationary offices, the question of what is compensable and what isn't is fairly straightforward, though there is always the potential for complexity in certain circumstances. However, the waters are often muddier for workers whose jobs are not stationary.

A good example of this was recently seen in the case of Trezza v. USA Trucking Inc., before the Arkansas Supreme Court. Although this is an out-of-state case, it's relevant here in Georgia, as there are thousands of licensed commercial truckers in this state.

Continue reading "Trezza v. USA Truck Inc. - Injury Not Compensable Minutes After "Logout"" »

November 2, 2014

Friebel v. Visiting Nurse - Dual Intent Doctrine Struck Down in OH

Workers are constantly forced to multitask, particularly when it comes to juggling their personal and professional lives. Unfortunately, trying to be efficient cost one home health care nurse in Ohio the right to collect workers' compensation benefits, following a decision by the Ohio Supreme Court in Friebel v. Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Mid-Ohio. carcrash2.jpg

The court ruled against the "dual intent" doctrine, which would have allowed a worker running a personal errand while on his or her way to the next assignment to collect benefits for a crash that occurred at that time.

Although the decision doesn't directly affect workers in Georgia, we can rest-assured courts will review this case when similar questions arise.

Continue reading "Friebel v. Visiting Nurse - Dual Intent Doctrine Struck Down in OH" »

October 30, 2014

Humphrey v. Lowe's - Workers' Compensation After Voluntary Exit

Georgia workers' compensation injury claims are rarely straightforward, even when it's clear injury occurred in the scope and course of employment.
This is especially true with regard to temporary total disability benefits when a worker quits, is fired or is laid-off for reasons unrelated to the injury.

Temporary total disability (TTD) benefits are those designed to help workers recover lost income when they are unable to work due to a job-related injury. Workers qualify if they cannot do the kind of work they did before because of the accident. If an employee is deemed entitled to collect temporary total disability benefits, those may continue until:

  • He returns to work

  • His doctor says he can return to work

  • His doctor says he has permanent disability that is not expected to improve (at which point you can seek permanent disability benefits)

  • More than 400 weeks have passed since the injury (unless injuries are catastrophic, in which they case benefits could continue indefinitely)

Continue reading "Humphrey v. Lowe's - Workers' Compensation After Voluntary Exit" »

October 20, 2014

Barzey v. City of Cuthbert - Non-Dependent Parent Precluded From Workers' Comp Death Benefits

The Georgia Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of a provision of the Workers' Compensation Act that precludes non-dependent parents from recovering benefits following the death of an adult child killed in the course of employment.
In Barzey v. City of Cuthbert, plaintiff argued the provision violated her constitutional rights to equal protection and due process. The state supreme court disagreed, finding the law was sound, even though it left plaintiff with virtually no means of monetary recovery for her son's death.

Workers' compensation, the court reasoned, is established to allow exclusive remedy to an employee's heir's for the worker's death during the course of employment, and the act expressly states that compensation for the death of a worker is to be payable only to dependents, and even then, only during dependency.

Continue reading "Barzey v. City of Cuthbert - Non-Dependent Parent Precluded From Workers' Comp Death Benefits" »

October 10, 2014

Third-Party Co-Worker Lawsuit After Workers' Comp Claim

After filing a workers' compensation claim in Georgia, there may be other avenues of compensation available. These include third-party lawsuits, which can be brought against anyone from manufacturers of defective products to owners of a construction site where an injury occurred.
In some situations, third-party lawsuits may be brought against co-workers if it can be shown their negligent actions were proximate cause of your injuries. However, there is one key point that must be proven in order to bring a claim in these cases. It will need to be proven the co-worker was acting outside the scope of his or her employment at the time he or she caused the injury.

The Georgia Supreme Court set this precedent rather recently in the 2012 case of Smith v. Ellis, reversing the precedent set previously by the Court of Appeals ten years earlier in Ridley v. Monroe. The principle question in Smith was whether a worker who files for - and receives - workers' compensation in exchange for a no liability settlement with his employer is then allowed to turn around and sue the co-employee who caused the injury. The appellate court had answered "No" in Ridley, holding OCGA 34-9-11(a) bars such recovery because the employee has already obtained relief. The state supreme court held that while Ridley was correctly decided, and workers are barred from collecting compensation from co-workers acting within the scope of employment at the time of an accident, they may pursue damages from a co-worker as third-party if the co-worker was acting outside the scope of employment.

Continue reading "Third-Party Co-Worker Lawsuit After Workers' Comp Claim" »

October 1, 2014

Marta v. Reid - Late Payments in Workers' Compensation Claims

The Georgia Legislature recognized that when workers are injured on-the-job, they are entitled not only to receive adequate compensation, but also to obtain those benefits in a timely manner. In order to give employers incentive to comply, lawmakers passed a provision of OCGA 34-9-221 that allows for injured employees to seek the imposition of statutory penalties for late benefits payments.
Specifically, the law states benefits must be paid weekly, with the first becoming due on the 21st day after employer has knowledge of injury or death and has to be paid via electronic transfer. Payments that are not paid when due automatically accrue a 15 percent late penalty. Payments that are more than 20 days late accrue a 20 percent late fee.

These late penalties are payable not to the state but directly to the injured worker. However, that injured worker needs to file a claim for benefits, and it helps to have an experienced workers' compensation lawyer. Also, it's important to make those claims within a timely fashion. Otherwise, as the recent case of Marta v. Reid illustrates, the opportunity may be forever lost.

Continue reading "Marta v. Reid - Late Payments in Workers' Compensation Claims" »

September 28, 2014

Burkhart v. H.J. Heinz Co. - Asbestos Injury Deposition Inadmissible in Workers' Comp Case

If you have been injured in the course of your employment, generally the only compensation you can receive will come from your workers' compensation insurance. However, there are third-party liability exceptions. One of the most common examples is third-party toxic tort lawsuits against manufacturers who produced products containing asbestos.
Throughout the 20th Century, asbestos was in everything from floor tiles to insulation to piping. While many workers were unaware of it, those manufacturers knew how dangerous the asbestos was and yet failed to warn companies and their workers of those dangers.

Because of the latent nature of asbestos-related diseases, which typically don't manifest until several decades after exposure, we are only just now seeing the effect on workers today - many of whom might already be retired. Although the statute of limitations would generally bar claims filed so long after the injury occurred, time is often tolled in asbestos cases out of consideration for the fact the worker was unaware he or she was injured until decades after exposure. Because of the complex nature of occupational cancer cases, it's important to consult with an experienced Atlanta workers' compensation lawyer as soon as possible to explore all options.

Continue reading "Burkhart v. H.J. Heinz Co. - Asbestos Injury Deposition Inadmissible in Workers' Comp Case" »

September 21, 2014

Reed v. Malone's Mechanical - Third-Party Claims Must Be Comprehensive From Start

A recent third-party liability claim stemming from a work injury failed because plaintiff did not name all potential defendants soon enough in the process.
While this oversight seems obvious in hindsight, the reality is identifying all responsible parties, particularly on a multi-employer work site, can be challenging. Our Atlanta workers' compensation lawyers are experienced in conducting thorough investigations at the outset of the case, and continuing our exploration of the case in consideration of deadlines as facts become available.

Workers' compensation serves as an exclusive remedy to workers who are hurt on the job. But that exclusive remedy provision is applicable only to employers. Uutside of wanton disregard for worker safety, workers' compensation is the only means of collecting damages. The exception would be if a third-party is responsible, which was the assertion in the recent case of Reed v. Malone's Mechanical, Inc., et al. before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Continue reading "Reed v. Malone's Mechanical - Third-Party Claims Must Be Comprehensive From Start" »

September 14, 2014

Hayes v. Rosenbaum Signs - Employer Can't Take Inconsistent Positions on Work Injury Claim

Our Atlanta work injury lawyers expect employers to challenge workers' compensation claims on the grounds that they weren't actually caused by job duties. We also sometimes anticipate challenges to ongoing benefits, based on argument the underlying work injury has largely healed and other conditions have come into play.
However, in the recent case of Hayes v. Rosenbaum Signs, the employer initially agreed to cover medical costs. But then the employer stopped. When the worker filed a petition, the employer conceded the worker's job was a major contributing factor to his need for medical treatment. The case was dismissed. A year later, the employer again denied treatment, this time based on an evaluation by a new doctor indicating the original injury was likely not work-related.

Ultimately, the South Dakota Supreme Court was asked to weigh in the matter, and decide whether the employer was judicially estopped from taking this kind of inconsistent position.

Continue reading "Hayes v. Rosenbaum Signs - Employer Can't Take Inconsistent Positions on Work Injury Claim" »

September 7, 2014

Whigham v. Jackson Dawson Communications - Kickball Game Injuries Compensable

Sport's injuries are not typically covered under worker's compensation insurance. But as our Atlanta workers' compensation lawyers have come to know well, there are always exceptions.
A perfect example of this was highlighted recently in the case of Whigham v. Jackson Dawson Communications, weighed by the South Carolina Supreme Court.

The crux of this decision was whether injury occurred in the course of a work-related duty. As a marketing manager, the claimant was not in the business of professional kickball. However, as part of his employment, according to court records, he was required to attend twice-monthly meetings at which managers discussed, among other matters, the importance of team-building activities.

Continue reading "Whigham v. Jackson Dawson Communications - Kickball Game Injuries Compensable" »

August 25, 2014

Harris v. Millennium Hotel - Same-Sex Partnership and Workers' Compensation Benefits

Workers' compensation benefits are intended to aid an employee and his or her dependents in the event serious injury or death arises in the course of job-related functions.
Generally, for purposes of benefit collection, "spouses" are defined under workers' compensation law as individuals married to injured workers. Usually, live-in boyfriends and girlfriends are excluded from receiving workers' compensation benefits. But what if the couple is precluded by law from marrying?

Georgia, like many other states, has implemented a same-sex marriage ban that forbids homosexual couples from being married. The legislature banned it in 1996, and a constitutional amendment underscoring the same was passed in 2004.

Still, our Atlanta workers' compensation attorneys recognize there may be some hope for homosexual couples in this regard, given the recent precedent set by the U.S. Supreme Court's determination that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional, as well as the Alaska Supreme Court in Harris v. Millennium Hotel.

Continue reading "Harris v. Millennium Hotel - Same-Sex Partnership and Workers' Compensation Benefits" »

August 20, 2014

Gregory v. Cott - Workers' Compensation Exclusive Remedy for Some Injured Health Workers

Health care workers, including those who provide in-home care, are at high risk for violence on the job, especially when working with patients suffering from dementia, accompanied by aggression.
However, these workers may have difficulty securing damages from the patient and/or the patient's family if injured in an attack by the patient. In many of these cases, our Atlanta workers' compensation lawyers recognize workers' compensation benefits are likely to be the only remedy.

The recent case of Gregory v. Cott, decided recently by the California Supreme Court, illustrates the issues.

Continue reading "Gregory v. Cott - Workers' Compensation Exclusive Remedy for Some Injured Health Workers" »