Garner Law Office, P.C.

Georgia Court of Appeals Limits Application of "Rycroft" Defense in Workers' Compensation

Thu, 27 Feb 2025 19:19:00 GMT

The Georgia Court of Appeals today limited the application of the so-called " Rycroft defense" in workers' compensation cases. Put most simply, the Rycroft defense allowed an employer to escape any responsibility for a work injury where the employee had knowingly and willfully made a false representation about a prior injury, the employer relied upon that injury and hired the employee as a result of that reliance, and there is a causal injury between the false representation and the work injury.

Today, in McKay v. Inalfa Roof Systems, Inc., et al. , case no. A24A1422 (Ga.App. 2025), the employee had undisputedly failed to inform the employer of a prior injury to the same body part she injured in this case. The State Board found that her first injury, on June 11, 2021, was barred by the Rycroft defense. Following the June 11, 2021 back injury, but prior to returning to work, the claimant informed her supervisor both of the prior injury and her belief that the June 11, 2021 injury had aggravated it. Despite this knowledge, the employer returned her to work in the same job, on September 9, 2021, approximately two months after the accident. She then suffered a second on-the-job injury on September 14, 2021. So the timeline is roughly as follows:

July 16, 2012 -- pre-employment injury due to a four-wheeler accident

Late 2020 -- claimant begins work for employer and fails to disclose four-wheeler accident or injuries on post-hire questionnaire

June 16, 2021 -- first injury at work

September 9, 2021 -- claimant, who has now informed employer of both the July 16, 2012 injury and her belief the June 16, 2021 injury aggravated it, returns to work

September 14, 2021 -- claimant suffers second injury

The only issue on appeal was whether the second injury on September 14, 2021, after the employer was notified of the pre-employment injury and returned her to work anyway, was barred by the Rycroft defense. The employer argued, and the State Board of Workers' Compensation held, that it was. The McKay Court reversed that finding today.

The McKay Court reasoned that:

The common law underpinnings of the Rycroft defense — theories of fraud and fraudulent inducement to contract — require that a party rely on the false representation to his detriment, and that the reliance be justified. In the fraudulent-inducement-to-contract context, a party’s failure to rescind or repudiate the agreement after learning of the fraudulent representation acts as a waiver of that defense. By analogy, Inalfa’s willingness to retain McKay in the assembly operator position, after learning of her prior back injury and false representation about it, waives its right to use the Rycroft defense to deny McKay workers’ compensation benefits for the subsequent injury she suffered.

The Court thus found the second, September 14, 2021 injury to be compensable.

This is a victory for injured workers in the State of Georgia. If allowed to stand, the State Board's ruling would have essentially meant that employers can return employees to work, knowing in full they had a pre-employment injury, and yet never have to pay them workers' compensation benefits if they are injured. The ruling turned the Rycroft case on its head, as the Court of Appeals rightly found, by taking the fraud and reliance elements out of consideration and rendering the Rycroft defense a punitive measure rather than a remedial measure. That is, the State Board saw fit to punish the claimant for not disclosing the prior injury, rather than remediating the damage done to the employer by the failure to disclose. But Rycroft was never meant to be punitive -- it was intended to apply contract principles to the employer/employee relationship such that the employer could not be induced to hire someone who was prone to injury when that person knowingly and willfully failed to disclose the injury after being asked.

We know this because the Rycroft case actually requires the employer to ask. The Rycroft Court held that an employee may not falsely respond to a questionnaire given by the employer in order to determine suitability to do the job. It did not state, or imply, that the employee has an affirmative responsibility to outline each and every injury she has ever suffered, or to disclose potential disabilities. The employer has to ask.

There are many and varied reasons why this is the case, and the Rycroft Court spelled them out. Suffice it to say, it was never intended to give employers a free pass to continue to employ workers infinitely with absolutely no risk that they will ever have to pay for a work injury. The defense is intended to apply to give a remedy to an employer who was unaware of a previous injury. It was never intended to protect an employer who became aware, and the McKay Court rightly held as much.

The Georgia Court of Appeals today limited the application of the so-called " Rycroft defense" in workers' compensation cases. Put most simply, the Rycroft defense allowed an employer to escape any responsibility for a work injury where the employee had knowingly and willfully made a false representation about a prior injury, the employer relied upon that injury and hired the employee as a result of that reliance, and there is a causal injury between the false representation and the work injury.

Today, in McKay v. Inalfa Roof Systems, Inc., et al. , case no. A24A1422 (Ga.App. 2025), the employee had undisputedly failed to inform the employer of a prior injury to the same body part she injured in this case. The State Board found that her first injury, on June 11, 2021, was barred by the Rycroft defense. Following the June 11, 2021 back injury, but prior to returning to work, the claimant informed her supervisor both of the prior injury and her belief that the June 11, 2021 injury had aggravated it. Despite this knowledge, the employer returned her to work in the same job, on September 9, 2021, approximately two months after the accident. She then suffered a second on-the-job injury on September 14, 2021. So the timeline is roughly as follows:

July 16, 2012 -- pre-employment injury due to a four-wheeler accident

Late 2020 -- claimant begins work for employer and fails to disclose four-wheeler accident or injuries on post-hire questionnaire

June 16, 2021 -- first injury at work

September 9, 2021 -- claimant, who has now informed employer of both the July 16, 2012 injury and her belief the June 16, 2021 injury aggravated it, returns to work

September 14, 2021 -- claimant suffers second injury

The only issue on appeal was whether the second injury on September 14, 2021, after the employer was notified of the pre-employment injury and returned her to work anyway, was barred by the Rycroft defense. The employer argued, and the State Board of Workers' Compensation held, that it was. The McKay Court reversed that finding today.

The McKay Court reasoned that:

The common law underpinnings of the Rycroft defense — theories of fraud and fraudulent inducement to contract — require that a party rely on the false representation to his detriment, and that the reliance be justified. In the fraudulent-inducement-to-contract context, a party’s failure to rescind or repudiate the agreement after learning of the fraudulent representation acts as a waiver of that defense. By analogy, Inalfa’s willingness to retain McKay in the assembly operator position, after learning of her prior back injury and false representation about it, waives its right to use the Rycroft defense to deny McKay workers’ compensation benefits for the subsequent injury she suffered.

The Court thus found the second, September 14, 2021 injury to be compensable.

This is a victory for injured workers in the State of Georgia. If allowed to stand, the State Board's ruling would have essentially meant that employers can return employees to work, knowing in full they had a pre-employment injury, and yet never have to pay them workers' compensation benefits if they are injured. The ruling turned the Rycroft case on its head, as the Court of Appeals rightly found, by taking the fraud and reliance elements out of consideration and rendering the Rycroft defense a punitive measure rather than a remedial measure. That is, the State Board saw fit to punish the claimant for not disclosing the prior injury, rather than remediating the damage done to the employer by the failure to disclose. But Rycroft was never meant to be punitive -- it was intended to apply contract principles to the employer/employee relationship such that the employer could not be induced to hire someone who was prone to injury when that person knowingly and willfully failed to disclose the injury after being asked.

We know this because the Rycroft case actually requires the employer to ask. The Rycroft Court held that an employee may not falsely respond to a questionnaire given by the employer in order to determine suitability to do the job. It did not state, or imply, that the employee has an affirmative responsibility to outline each and every injury she has ever suffered, or to disclose potential disabilities. The employer has to ask.

There are many and varied reasons why this is the case, and the Rycroft Court spelled them out. Suffice it to say, it was never intended to give employers a free pass to continue to employ workers infinitely with absolutely no risk that they will ever have to pay for a work injury. The defense is intended to apply to give a remedy to an employer who was unaware of a previous injury. It was never intended to protect an employer who became aware, and the McKay Court rightly held as much.

There Is No Such Thing as a Technicality

Tue, 31 Dec 2024 17:10:29 GMT

Technicality or Design?

Our Constitution has safeguards built in for a reason. When an officer stops someone and lacks probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, and then unlawfully searches that person's car and finds drugs or other contraband, it is not a "technicality" that the person is set free and not convicted of a crime. It is exactly how our Constitution is supposed to work. When a case is pled down to a lesser offense because the state lacks the evidence to convict of the offense charged, that is not a "technicality," it is justice. When a minor is interrogated outside the presence of their parents or attorneys, or when a person is interrogated without being apprised of their rights, or when a vehicle or home is searched with neither a proper warrant nor a valid exception to a warrant, it is not a "technicality" to refuse to convict the accused, even if those things result in a confession, or evidence of a crime.

The police are not allowed to violate the Constitution. Most of the time they are well trained and know that. Some officers reason that if they can get by with skirting those lines, a "guilty" person will be "taken off the streets." And too often people cheer this mentality rather than rightly being skeptical of it. Fewer officers outright lie, or flagrantly break the rules in order to secure a conviction, but that happens as well. When Thomas Jefferson famously said "it is better for ten guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be imprisoned," this is what he was talking about. It is not just to allow rules to be broken to "get the bad guy." It is certainly not a "technicality." It is an abuse of the justice system and an affront to our entire way of life.

What we casually refer to as "technicalities" are actually safeguards, put in place by the Founders, the courts, Congress and state lawmakers in order to ensure fair play. When you are charged with a crime, the government has the burden of proving your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. When the government violates your rights in the process of gathering evidence, by requiring you to incriminate yourself, or searching your home or property without justification, the law punishes them and refuses to allow a conviction, even if the misconduct uncovered evidence of guilt. So I suppose "technicality" is right, in that "technically" the government cheated the system.

Is Offensive Speech Disorderly Conduct?

kyle.taylor@levitateapp.com (Kyle Taylor) — Mon, 16 Dec 2024 17:12:33 GMT

What conduct is disorderly?

"Without provocation, uses to or of another person in such other person's presence, opprobrious or abusive words which by their very utterance tend to incite to an immediate breach of the peace, that is to say, words which as a matter of common knowledge and under ordinary circumstances will, when used to or of another person in such other person's presence, naturally tend to provoke violent resentment, that is, words commonly called 'fighting words.'"

"Use any type of profane or lewd language in a public place that is offensive to another, causes another to become outraged and thus creates a turmoil."

To whom does the law apply?

The other instance in this case that made it somewhat different is that one person involved was a police officer. There was no allegation or even suggestion that others heard the offensive speech. Police officers, in general are held to a higher standard, as our Court of Appeals has said, relying on United States Supreme Court precedent:

"Lastly, although the State argues that 'there should not be a different standard when opprobrious and abusive language is directed toward a police officer,' the Supreme Court of the United States and other federal courts have indicated that the fighting-words exception to constitutionally protected speech 'requires a narrower application in cases involving words addressed to a police officer.' This is because a 'properly trained officer may reasonably be expected to exercise a higher degree of restraint than the average citizen, and thus be less likely to respond belligerently to 'fighting words.'' Additionally, as the Supreme Court has further explained, 'the First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.' Indeed, the freedom of individuals verbally to 'oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state.'"

Knowles v. State , 340 Ga.App. 274; 797 S.E.2d 197 (Ga.App. 2017) (citations omitted).

This is perhaps more obvious when considering the facts of this case. When it comes to whether the language at issue was "threatening" language, my client was unarmed, whereas the officer in question had a firearm, a Taser, and pepper spray, along with other officers present or close by. If anyone should have felt threatened, it was my client.

Finally, the Supreme Court of Georgia has held that "fighting words" is not so much a function of the specific words used, but whether the person on the receiving end of them considers them sufficient to provoke violence or breach of the peace:

"OCGA § 16–11–39 (a) (1) does not reach any, let alone a substantial amount of, constitutionally protected conduct. As mentioned previously, a person may only be found guilty of disorderly conduct under OCGA § 16–11–39 (a) (1) based on allegedly tumultuous conduct when he or she 'acts in a ... tumultuous manner toward another person whereby such person is placed in reasonable fear of the safety of such person's life, limb, or health." The statute on its face contains no prohibition against any particular message being communicated, and it makes clear that the level of 'tumultuous' behavior necessary to give rise to a sustainable charge must involve acts that would place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety. In this sense, it could be argued that the statute applies only to physical 'acts' that do not implicate speech at all."

Freeman v. State , 302 Ga. 181; 805 S.E.2d 845 (2017).

On a side note, 2017 was apparently a banner year for free speech in Georgia.

So I can cuss out police officers with impunity, right?

Not so fast. First, the fact that the words in the above cases, like the words in my case, did not amount to "fighting words," does not in any way mean that other words might not. Use of racial slurs, threats, comments about the officer's family, or other such words might lead reviewing courts to apply the statute or municipal code differently. As a general rule, it is best not to go around cursing at anyone, let alone someone who can arrest you and put you in jail, however temporarily. Second, even if you are Constitutionally protected, my client had to be arrested, go to jail, bond out, and hire me to get out of this predicament. Whether he could sue the municipality in question and win is perhaps a legitimate question. What he would get out of that is perhaps the bigger question. You can sue someone and "win," yet still "lose" in the sense that it costs you more to litigate than you can possibly recover. So the fact that my client did not commit a crime does not mean his conduct was helpful, or worth the trouble. I believe he would be the first to tell you that. Third, let's suppose the prosecutor in question was disinclined to dismiss the charges. My client would have to stand trial, risking a conviction and sentence on both charges. If convicted, he would have to appeal. By the time this case wound its way to the state Supreme Court (I'd like to think this case would not rise to the Federal level), we are no longer talking about thousands of dollars, but tens of thousands of dollars. And while I think the dismissal of the charges is a good indication that he would probably win, at least on appeal if not at trial, once you go before the judge there are no guarantees.

So why was there no conviction on resisting arrest?

Good question! In this case, there is no question my client resisted arrest. However, the arrest in question was for disorderly conduct, a crime he did not commit, and which the officers lacked probable cause to believe he committed. It is not a crime to resist an unlawful arrest. Because the unlawful arrest led to the charge of resisting, that charge could not stand either.

So you think it's okay to swear at police officers?

Not at all! I don't blame the officer in this case for being upset at the language used. I don't blame her for thinking this might be disorderly conduct (everyone makes mistakes). Police officers have a tough job, and as noted above, are held to a higher standard than you or I. It's not an easy thing to listen to someone verbally accost you and have to just swallow your pride and take it. But that, ultimately, is what the law required in this case, on these facts. The fact that something is not a crime does not mean it is advisable.

We all have bad days. My client had a bad day when he was arrested. The officer had a bad day when she made an unlawful arrest on charges that were ultimately dismissed in the interests of justice. The city had a bad day in that it had to bring charges, house my client, process bond, and ultimately have a prosecutor paid by the city come in and dismiss the charges, so a lot of time and money were wasted. But in the end, justice was done. I would like to think everyone can call that a good day. Each of us is better than our bad days.

But if you have a bad day, know your rights so you can hopefully keep it from getting any worse.

How Can An Attorney Help With Your DUI Case

Mon, 04 Nov 2024 20:21:00 GMT

Navigating Your DUI Defense: How an Attorney Can Help

Facing a DUI charge can be overwhelming and frightening. The consequences of a conviction can be severe, impacting your driving privileges, finances, and even your freedom. However, with the right legal support, you can navigate this challenging process more effectively. In this post, we'll explore how an attorney can assist you in your DUI defense, outlining the steps involved and the critical role they play in protecting your rights.

Understanding the DUI Charge

Before delving into how an attorney can help, it’s essential to understand what a DUI charge entails. A DUI (Driving Under the Influence) occurs when a person is accused of operating a vehicle while impaired by alcohol or drugs. Each state has its own laws regarding DUI, including legal blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limits, penalties for first-time and repeat offenders, and procedures for handling DUI arrests. Navigating through the charges, understanding the possible outcomes, and understanding the consequences of the decisions you make after a DUI arrest can be a daunting task.

The Initial Consultation

The first step after a DUI arrest is contacting and meeting or having a phone consultation with a DUI attorney. This initial consultation is crucial. During this meeting, I will:

Building Your Defense

Once you’ve retained me, I will begin the process of building your defense. This involves several key steps:

Navigating Court Proceedings

If your case goes to court, having an experienced attorney by your side is invaluable. I will:

Post-Conviction Support

If you are convicted, I can still be of service. I will help you understand the consequences and navigate options such as:

Conclusion

A DUI charge doesn’t have to define your future. With the assistance of a knowledgeable attorney, you can navigate the complexities of the legal system, protect your rights, and work toward the best possible outcome. If you find yourself facing a DUI charge, consider reaching out to me as soon as possible.

DUI Law 101

Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:01:00 GMT

Navigating DUI Charges: What You Need to Know

Understanding DUI Charges and Their Consequences

Facing a DUI charge can be overwhelming, and understanding the legal landscape is crucial to navigating this challenging situation. Whether you are a first-time offender or have previous convictions, it is essential to know your rights, the potential consequences, and the steps you can take to protect yourself.

What is a DUI?

A DUI, or Driving Under the Influence, refers to operating a vehicle while impaired by alcohol or drugs. In most jurisdictions, a DUI charge is based on blood alcohol content (BAC) levels, which in Georgia means a BAC of 0.08% or higher. However, impairment isn’t solely determined by BAC; other factors, such as erratic driving behavior or failed field sobriety tests, can also lead to DUI charges. In Georgia, this is called "less safe" DUI. The takeaway is this -- you do not have to demonstrate a BAC over the legal limit of 0.08% to be charged with and convicted of DUI.

The Consequences of a DUI Conviction

A DUI conviction can have serious, long-lasting effects on your life. Consequences may include:

Steps to Take After a DUI Arrest

How a DUI Lawyer Can Help

A knowledgeable DUI lawyer can make a significant difference in your case. Here’s how:

Conclusion

Dealing with a DUI charge is a serious matter, but having the right legal support can make all the difference. If you find yourself facing DUI charges, don’t hesitate to seek professional help. At Garner Law Office, we are committed to providing personalized, effective legal representation to guide you through this challenging time.

Contact us today for a free consultation to discuss your case and explore your options. Remember, with the right lawyer by your side, you can work towards achieving the best possible outcome.

5 Common Mistakes to Avoid When Filing a Workers' Compensation Claim

Mon, 12 Aug 2024 17:26:00 GMT

5 Common Mistakes to Avoid When Filing a Workers’ Compensation Claim

Introduction

Filing a workers’ compensation claim can be a complex and daunting process, especially when you’re recovering from an injury. Even minor missteps can have significant consequences for the outcome of your claim. As a workers’ compensation attorney, I’ve seen firsthand how certain mistakes can jeopardize an otherwise valid claim. In this blog post, we’ll discuss five common mistakes to avoid when filing a workers’ compensation claim and offer guidance on how to navigate the process effectively.

1. Failing to Report the Injury Promptly

Mistake: One of the most common errors workers make is not reporting their injury immediately to their employer. Delays in reporting can lead to complications with your claim.

Why It’s a Mistake: Georgia law requires you to report your injury within 30 days of the accident. Failing to do so can result in denial of your claim, and can also create complications in proving that your injury is work-related.

What to Do Instead: Report your injury to your employer as soon as possible after the incident. Ensure that you complete any necessary paperwork and keep a copy for your records. Prompt reporting helps establish a clear connection between your injury and your work environment, which is crucial for a successful claim.

2. Not Seeking Medical Attention Right Away

Mistake: Another common mistake is delaying medical treatment after a work-related injury. Some workers might try to tough it out or assume that their injury isn’t serious enough to warrant immediate care.

Why It’s a Mistake: Delaying medical attention can not only worsen your condition but also make it harder to link your injuries to the workplace incident. Insurance companies may argue that your injuries were not severe or that they were caused by something other than the work accident.

What to Do Instead: Seek medical attention as soon as possible after your injury. A prompt medical evaluation will provide documentation of your injuries and treatment, which is essential for your claim. Follow your doctor’s advice and keep detailed records of all medical visits and treatments.

3. Providing Inaccurate or Incomplete Information

Mistake: Providing inaccurate or incomplete information about your injury, work conditions, or medical history can hurt your claim.

Why It’s a Mistake: Inaccurate information can lead to questions about your credibility and the validity of your claim. Insurance adjusters may use inconsistencies or omissions to challenge your claim or reduce the amount of benefits you receive.

What to Do Instead: Ensure that all information you provide to your employer, medical professionals, and the insurance company is accurate and complete. Double-check forms and reports for errors and ensure that all relevant details are included. If you’re unsure about any aspect of your claim, consult with a workers’ compensation attorney.

4. Accepting the First Settlement Offer Without Legal Advice

Mistake: Insurance companies often extend initial settlement offers that may seem appealing but are typically lower than what you’re entitled to. Accepting the first offer without proper legal advice is a common mistake.

Why It’s a Mistake: Initial offers may not fully account for future medical expenses, lost wages, or long-term impacts of your injury. Once you accept a settlement, it is almost impossible to obtain additional compensation from your employer and its insurer if your needs change.

What to Do Instead: Before accepting any settlement offer, consult with a workers’ compensation attorney. An experienced lawyer can evaluate the offer, consider your future needs, and negotiate on your behalf to ensure that you receive a fair settlement.

5. Failing to Keep Detailed Records

Mistake: Not maintaining detailed records of your injury, medical treatment, and communication with insurance companies is a mistake that can negatively impact your claim.

Why It’s a Mistake: Detailed records are crucial for documenting the extent of your injuries, the treatment you’ve received, and the impact on your life. Lack of proper documentation can make it difficult to prove the full extent of your damages.

What to Do Instead: Keep thorough records of all aspects of your claim, including medical records, bills, and correspondence with your employer and the insurance company. Document your daily symptoms, treatment progress, and any related expenses. This information will support your claim and help demonstrate the severity of your injury.

Conclusion

Avoiding these common mistakes can significantly improve your chances of a successful workers’ compensation claim. By promptly reporting your injury, seeking immediate medical attention, providing accurate information, consulting with an attorney before accepting any settlement, and keeping detailed records, you can better navigate the complexities of the workers’ compensation process.

If you need assistance with your workers’ compensation claim or have questions about the process, don’t hesitate to reach out. Contact Garner Law Office, P.C. for a free consultation, and let us help you ensure that your rights are protected and that you receive the benefits you deserve.

When Should I Pursue a Workers' Compensation Case?

Wed, 14 Jun 2023 16:22:00 GMT

A frequent comment I get from workers' compensation inquirers is "I don't know if I even need a lawyer for this." And often, they are right. But how do you know? Often, a case where a lawyer should have been hired, but was not, is far more difficult and far less likely to end with the client treated fairly as compared to a case where a lawyer was hired from the start.

A few tips on how to determine whether you need an attorney.

First, what kind of job do you have? A career firefighter or police officer, teacher, career government employee, or a highly paid white collar worker, may value their career far more highly than whatever value exists in a workers' compensation claim. In general, these types of workers will need to consider hiring a lawyer when the employer or insurer is not paying for something they should, delaying or refusing treatment, or otherwise being grossly unfair with the claimant, or if the injury is so serious that it will threaten your ability to return to the job in any event. If the employer and insurer is paying for all of your medical treatment, paying you for your time out of work, and working with you on return to work issues such that you are able to work within your restrictions, and the injury is such that you are likely to be able to return to your normal job, hiring an attorney is probably not going to improve your standing with your employer, and is unlikely to result in you getting more benefits than you are currently receiving. That does not mean you should not consult with an attorney. It just means any good attorney is going to be honest with you and tell you whether they can help you or not. And if they cannot, they will suggest to you that your job is more valuable than the case.

Second, what type of injury do you have? I have clients who have relatively minor injuries, but the claim is denied and the employment is not as "career" oriented as those mentioned above, and I am always happy to assist with that sort of case as long as I can provide some value to the client. I also have clients with terrible, catastrophic, life altering injuries who need my assistance no matter what type of job they have. In general, the worse you are injured, the more the workers' compensation system is going to shortchange you. The system is designed as a compromise, and while a horrific injury is objectively more valuable than a minor injury, the system is not really designed to make you whole. When you get a more significant settlement, but you will never be able to work again, or perhaps will have to change to a lower paying profession due to your injury, the fact that your settlement was bigger is cold comfort. That is why with more severe injuries, it is imperative to get legal assistance to maximize your recovery.

Third, what is your goal? If your goal is to get a lot of money for your minor injury and keep your job, that is something the workers' compensation system is not really designed to accomplish for you. If your goal is to return to work after your injury and resume your normal job, an attorney may or may not be able to help, but an honest attorney will give you all of the pros and cons of obtaining legal counsel. If your goal is to maximize your recovery so you can transition to another line of work or ensure you are able to get continued care for an ongoing, permanent disability, an attorney can certainly help you with that.

When in doubt, call us. I often turn down cases and even advise people not to hire me or another attorney because it does not make sense to hire an attorney at this stage. You will get an honest opinion about your case, and the reassurance that I will not have you sign a fee agreement only to leave you worse off than if you had not hired me.

You've been charged with a DUI? Don't wait.

Tue, 28 Feb 2023 21:51:00 GMT

When charged with a crime, sometimes it's easy to assume that you have plenty of time to hire an attorney and defend the case. Sometimes, especially with a traffic citation, even a serious one like a DUI, you may even think you can handle it yourself. Be wary.

The 30-day letter:

If you're wondering what a 30-day letter is, let me suggest that this is why you should consider retaining an attorney. Sometimes with a DUI, you only have the underlying charge to deal with. However, in some cases, the arresting officer decides you did not voluntarily comply with a request to provide chemical analysis of your breath or blood. This is called "implied consent." As part of the State of Georgia's licensing scheme for drivers, you implicitly consent to have your breath or blood tested if the officer has probable cause to ask for it. If you refuse, or if the officer merely claims you refused , then your license can be suspended for 12 months. There is no temporary or hardship permit available. You will be without driving privileges for 12 months.

It's okay, though, because I did not refuse a test:

Oh, you agreed to blow in a breathalyzer, right? You didn't refuse. So, of course, this has nothing to do with you! Don't believe it. I have multiple cases in my office right now where the client blew in a breathalyzer at the scene, was not offered the opportunity to give blood or blow in a breathalyzer at the jail, and they were still submitted to the Department of Driver's Services as a refusal. The breathalyzer at the jail is the one that counts for implied consent, not the portable one on the side of the roadway. A blood test at the jail is also valid. Refuse either of those, and you can expect your license to be suspended. But the more important point is, even if you did not refuse, if the officer claims you did, you have 30 days to contest his false claim or you will lose your license. There are not very many good options if you do not appeal the administrative suspension, so get in touch with a lawyer immediately if you have been charged with a DUI. Do not assume your license will not be suspended simply because you agreed to blow in a breathalyzer on the roadside, or even at the jail. You have 30 days to appeal, or you will serve the full 12 month suspension.

The Administrative License Suspension Hearing:

This is not your trial for your DUI case, and really has nothing to do with the DUI charge itself. Let's say you refused to blow in a breathalyzer, and you received notice from the officer that your license is being suspended. If that happens, the "30-day letter" is just a notice to the Department of Driver's Services that you would like to appeal the suspension. Even if the officer had probable cause to stop you and request the test, you can appear at the ALS hearing and seek to have the suspension dismissed. Sometimes the officer doesn't show. Other times the officer does show and you may agree to plead guilty to DUI or a lesser charge in exchange for having the suspension dropped. In either case, you save your license until the DUI is adjudicated. If you plead guilty to DUI in court, there is a mandatory suspension, but you can get a temporary permit, which remember, you cannot if you let the implied consent suspension take effect. If you plead to a lesser charge, often there is no suspension at all. Thus, the biggest threat to your driving privileges is not the DUI charge itself. It is the administrative suspension of your license for refusing to submit to chemical testing of your breath or blood. And again, even if you did not refuse, often the officer will claim you did and submit the case to DDS for a suspension. So contact a lawyer immediately to preserve your driving privileges.

The police are not your friend:

Police officers are good people, usually seeking to make society safe for all of us, and we respect them and appreciate the work they do. This is not a statement on the moral character of police officers. However, they are not there to be your buddy. They are not there to be honest with you. Their sole mission when they charge you with a DUI is to collect enough evidence to convict you. Any honest police officer will tell you this. But they will probably not tell you that on the side of the road when they are conducting a DUI investigation.

Sometimes this is obvious. I cannot count the times a client has said "the officer was a real jerk," and then we find out the officer claims my client refused when they actually did not. Every group has its bad apples. But other times, the officer is real nice, even chatty or friendly. Most police officers are not going to lie in order to obtain a conviction. But some will. You don't have the luxury of picking which one you get. So when you are charged, do not think that just because the officer said he's trying to do you a favor, that means you can trust him. Police officers don't exist to do favors for those they think have been driving under the influence. They are there to arrest them and collect sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

Do not go it alone:

The penalties for DUI are too severe to take lightly. Proceeding without an attorney is taking it lightly. If you have been charged with a DUI, call us at (770) 575-2747 today to discuss your case.

Who is My Neighbor?

Mon, 26 Dec 2022 15:00:00 GMT

I am an attorney. I represent clients for a living. That means I have to do this in order to earn money to feed my family. But if that were the only reason I did it, I would lead an empty life indeed.

Being an attorney is not merely my job. It is my vocation. From the Latin vocare , which means "to call or summon," a vocation is a calling, something we do because it fulfills a higher purpose. That is fundamentally different from a job, which as we understand it in modern society is something of a utilitarian venture. A job is something you do because you have to. A vocation is something you do because you believe doing it furthers the greater good.

My role in society is to help those who have been harmed, defend those who have been accused, and guide those who are mired in our often byzantine legal system, so that they can come out on the other side of that experience better off. Attorneys get a bad reputation in society. Personal injury attorney are often subjected to slurs like "ambulance chaser." Criminal defense attorneys are often accused of using legal technicalities to allow guilty criminals to continue to roam the streets unchecked. Neither of these is true. It is true that a very small number of personal injury attorneys are a detriment to society, bringing claims that lack merit to force settlements that are undeserved. It is also true that a very small number of criminal defense attorneys are a detriment to society, trying to find loopholes to ensure the guilty are not punished, and even blaming the innocent for being the victim of a crime. But neither of those things is true of the vast majority of us.

Imagine instead a world where, having been injured through the fault of another person, you are at the mercy of an insurance company, which has a profit motive to pay as little as possible for your injuries. Imagine your valid claims are denied, your medical treatment delayed, or your income benefits withheld simply because the insurance company wants to minimize its exposure. Now imagine that insurance company has a mechanism to avoid its own risk by setting its premiums in such a way to pass on the majority of that risk to its insureds. And in auto accident and worker's compensation cases, further imagine that people are actually required by law to purchase the very insurance product that provides you little risk and much control over what may be charged. Would it surprise you that this is actually the world we live in?

Or imagine a world where you have been accused of a crime. Perhaps you did something, but not what you are charged with. Or perhaps you did nothing wrong. Imagine the police have the right to put you in jail, take away your freedom, suspend your driving privileges, cause your insurance rates to go up, solely on the basis that the officer believes you committed a crime. I'd wager every person reading this has at least one story to tell about the cop that pulled you over and was not fair with you, accused you of things you didn't do, and cited you for crimes you did not commit. Imagine further that the Constitution provides you certain protections, but unlike those contained in a Miranda warning, they do not have to tell you about those protections. For example, imagine they can authoritatively ask permission to search your car, and if you acquiesce, even if you only do so because you are intimidated or they threaten to hold you up while obtaining a warrant, you cannot challenge the Constitutionality of the search. Or imagine the police can actually lie to you in order to get your confession to certain things, and then use those things against you (for example, perhaps they suggest your passenger has already told them you've been drinking). Would it surprise you to know that's also the world we live in?

I don't write these things to suggest the world is so unfair and we should alter it to ensure that people who are injured have no need of demonstrating their injuries or the cause of them, or that criminals cannot be prosecuted for crimes they actually commit. This is not a lament so much as an observation. We live in a world that is unfair. The government and large corporations and insurers have more money than you and I do, and they spend that money to achieve their preferred ends. I also do not mean demean insurers or those who work for them. Insurance agents, claims personnel and others are just doing their job. But make no mistake, they are not looking out for those who file claims. Their loyalty is to the company they work for. They are good people who represent one side in a dispute. The same is true of police and prosecutors. They are not out to get you for the most part, and while they make mistakes, they are also not actively trying to ruin the lives of people who are charged with crimes. In most cases, they would love nothing more than to see you return to society better off than you were when they pulled you over to begin with. They, too, have a vocation.

I do write it to suggest that the next time someone tells you how awful lawyers are, perhaps consider the good we do. The old joke is "everyone hates lawyers until they need one." Maybe as a society we could begin to work to soften the first part of that joke. Most of us are doing no more than fulfilling our calling. And I am grateful to be able to do it.

In the Parable of the Good Samaritan, a transcendent lesson is taught. Famously, and in my case perhaps ironically, the "teacher of the law" asked "who is my neighbor?" The lesson was abundantly clear. Three men found a man lying on the side of the road that day, a priest, a Levite and a Samaritan, and only one, the Samaritan, the enemy, the one who was at enmity with the man lying in the roadway, was the one who cared for his neighbor. The one who, in the words of the "teacher of the law" "showed mercy to him." This is what vocation is about, and why I consider myself blessed to have the one I do. Many of my clients come to me with negative views of lawyers. I hope I am able to serve them in such a way as to soften their heart. Many more come to me with problems that leave others with negative feelings about them. Maybe they have been charged with a DUI, or been injured at work and are being viewed as someone who is faking or exaggerating an injury for profit, or were in a car wreck and are trying to recover damages and viewed as someone who wants to profit from an injury. Whatever the case, I always treat my clients with compassion and empathy.

We are in this together. When you need me, even if you don't like people like me very much, or especially if others don't like you very much, I am here to help. It is part of my calling. And it is one I am extraordinarily fortunate to be able to fulfill.

What Can I Expect From My Lawyer?

Fri, 16 Dec 2022 14:52:00 GMT

If you've never hired a lawyer before, it can sometimes be difficult to know what to expect. And the truth is, often what you can expect will differ depending on the type of lawyer you hire. In my practice, I am fortunate to help people who need assistance navigating difficult times in their lives. This means my clients are rarely calling me during the best times in their lives. This post will outline what I consider to be good legal service and competent representation, as well as the simple day-to-day handling of a particular case.

With clients who have suffered an injury, whether it is an injury sustained at work or in an accident due to someone else's negligence, the first thing you should expect from your lawyer is compassion. I only take cases that I believe have merit. The reason for this is simple. I do not get paid on personal injury or workers' compensation cases unless I recover compensation. This means that if I take the so-called "frivolous" cases you often hear about from people who do not like attorneys very much, then I am doing two things wrong. First, I am putting work into cases that I have little chance of ever seeing a reasonable fee on. The second is I am taking time away from other cases that do have merit. When you come to us with a personal injury or workers' compensation claim, you can expect that I believe in your case, or I would not agree to take on the representation. Because of this, you can also expect compassion and empathy. We will treat you with respect and we will understand that you are suffering, and we will do our best to get you the medical care you need to alleviate your suffering. We will also do our best to recover the compensation to which the law entitles you.

With clients accused of traffic offenses or DUI, often our clients have admittedly done something wrong, but perhaps have been accused of more than they actually did. Other times our clients are guilty of the crimes of which they are accused. Still other times our clients are innocent of the charges against them. In these cases, the fee is paid up front, so the main part of my job is to accurately assess whether you have been properly charged, educate you about the consequences, and assess the risk of going to trial versus working out a plea bargain. Because I am paid up front, you should expect an honest assessment of the charges against you and an honest evaluation of whether I can help you or not. Often, I get calls from people charged with very minor traffic offenses, who do not need an attorney. I will tell you that. More often, I get calls from people who have been charged with serious traffic offenses. Sometimes, I can be of assistance, and other times I cannot. I always try to honestly assess what I can do to assist, and if I believe there is any question as to whether I believe I can get the charges reduced, I tell potential clients that up front, before a fee is paid. The reason for this is also simple -- I do not want to have a reputation for taking money from people who end up in the same place they would end up if they didn't hire me, but have paid me a fee just to find that out. Sometimes, I tell clients "I am not sure I can help you with this" and they hire me anyway. But I work very hard not to have any surprises for the client once we end up in court. I try not to take a fee from someone unless I can actually improve their situation.

Above all, no matter the type of representation you need, you are entitled to honesty, good communication, and a fair assessment of the risks and benefits inherent in your case. My assistant is compassionate and as dedicated to our clients as I am. Since we are the only two people who work at this firm, you can expect that as a team, we will always put your best interests first. We will answer your calls, we will respond to your emails, and we will be sure that you understand the risks and benefits of proceeding with your case versus a settlement or plea bargain. As I've said before, we will treat you like a friend and neighbor.

Often, clients with one type of case end up with other legal issues. Some of these we can help with. We can draft a will or power of attorney, or assist you with certain aspects of a personal injury claim such as working out subrogation liens or ensuring medical bills are paid. We can assist you with issues regarding your driving privileges in cases where the charges against you result in a suspension. Other times, clients have legal issues that I am simply not competent to handle. You can expect that I will inform you of that and try to refer you to another attorney who is competent to assist you in that area. Not every lawyer can handle every type of case. An honest lawyer will tell you that instead of trying to get a fee on something he or she is incompetent to handle.

What do we expect from you? That is also simple. Good communication, cooperation in obtaining medical records or answering discovery or showing up for court, and a fair approach to the ultimate resolution of your case, whatever type of case you have. We understand our clients are often in stressful situations that are less than ideal. However, your cooperation in the handling of your case is paramount to getting a good result. I do not expect you to blindly follow my advice. I do expect that you will hear me out and let me explain why I believe the approach I suggest is in your best interest. It is for this reason that I do not settle cases before they are ready, and I do not plead out cases without having all the information you need to make a good decision.

Ultimately, hiring a lawyer complicates your life. You suddenly find yourself meeting discovery deadlines, having court dates or trial dates, answering questions about intimate details of your life in a deposition, and otherwise doing a lot of things that may seem disruptive to your life. The good news is, you do not have to do it alone. When you hire me on a matter, your problems related to that matter become my problems. And I will work as hard as I can to navigate you through them so you can get the best result possible.

What Makes Us Different?

Mon, 05 Dec 2022 15:00:00 GMT

My Design for Better Legal Representation

When I started this firm back in 2014, I had a wide range of experience. I have been licensed and practicing in Georgia since 1998, but I started my career in Jackson, Mississippi working for a solo practitioner who did a little bit of everything. I then went to a boutique medical malpractice litigation firm in Flowood, Mississippi just a couple of years before moving back to Georgia in 2005 to be closer to my family. I was hired at a large insurance defense firm doing workers' compensation defense almost exclusively.
Having that breadth of experience gave me a lot of ideas on what to do, and what not to do. For example, I knew I did not want to take every case that came in the door. I have a wide range of legal experience, having represented clients with a lot of different legal issues. However, I have deep and extensive experience in a lot fewer areas, and I wanted to ensure that when you hire me, you are hiring someone who knows what he is doing. For that reason, I have strictly limited my practice to helping injured workers in worker's compensation claims, representing those injured in automobile accidents or other personal injury cases, and defending those accused of offenses involving motor vehicles, including DUI. I stay in my lane, and I make sure that you, the client, have the best representation as a result.
Another area where I think my firm is different is in simple size and scope. When you retain me, you deal with me and my assistant. We are the only two people who work here. That means you get a level of personal attention that other firms cannot offer. I do not have, and I do not want to have, an office full of associate attorneys and paralegals. You hired a lawyer. You should get a lawyer. At my firm, you will. I also do not take more cases than I can reasonably handle. I want to ensure that your case gets proper attention, so I do not run a volume practice. That means I keep my overhead low, and it means I do not churn files to try to maintain cash flow to pay office staff and office expenses typically associated with a much larger firm.
One area I believe is highly important in terms of client service is staffing. When I started this firm, my wife was my office manager. After a couple of years, we began to supplement her work with a second office staff member, and then eventually my wife stopped working at the office and a full time office manager, paralegal, assistant and face of the operation took over her work. Those of you who have met my assistant know what a great asset she is to this practice. Because I don't need a veritable army of employees, I am able, and thankful, that I can concentrate on getting one really good employee. In turn, this means your case gets handled better.
When you hire a lawyer, ask yourself what you expect to receive in terms of service. Do you expect to be able to talk to your lawyer when you call? Do you expect his staff to be kind, courteous, empathetic and competent? Do you expect to know everyone in the firm by name? Do you want to be able to drop in and speak to someone who knows all about your case, or to call and ask questions without going through an automated machine or a series of lower level employees?
We are old school. We are a small, local, family firm, and we pride ourselves on top notch service and competent representation. I refuse to have it any other way.

Why Do I Need a Lawyer for a Traffic Citation?

Mon, 28 Nov 2022 15:32:00 GMT

So why should you hire a lawyer for a traffic citation? The short answer is "maybe you shouldn't." The longer answer follows.

There are three main classes of people who contact us who need representation on a traffic offense.

The first class should be obvious. If you are charged with any offense that carries mandatory jail time or a mandatory suspension of your license, you need a lawyer. While it is theoretically possible to handle these cases yourself, you don't know what you don't know, and the odds of you missing something along the way are high. The consequences of not handling these cases properly are severe. That is why they cost more, and it is why you need a lawyer to help you.

The second class may be less obvious. For the better part of 15 years now, young drivers have been subject to more severe penalties for traffic offenses. Zero point, non-reporting offenses are still roughly the same for young drivers, but when points are assessed, the result can be a mandatory suspension. If you are under 18, your license will be suspended if you get 4 or more cumulative points. This means if you have four 1-point violations in a consecutive 12 month period, your license will be suspended. When you turn 18, things get a little better, but until you turn 21, you will still be suspended for any single violation of 4 points or greater. This means as a younger driver, "I'll just pay the fine" is not always a wise choice. If you make the wrong call, your license will be suspended and it may be too late to change that after the fact. Even if it is possible to set aside your guilty plea, the attorney's fee to do this will be significantly more expensive than if you'd simply hired a lawyer to begin with.

The third class also might not be immediately obvious. Most commercial drivers are aware they are held to a higher standard than a non-commercial license holder. However, the complexity of CDL cases may not be immediately apparent to the CDL holder. For example, in cases where a non-CDL driver would not have points assessed or have the offense reported to the Department of Driver Services ("DDS"), a CDL driver will have the offense reported in many cases, including "too fast for conditions" or speeding under 15 miles per hour. This means the offense, while it will still carry zero points, will also show up on a Motor Vehicle Report ("MVR"), and therefore will be seen by your employer and their insurance carrier. In some cases this might not cost you your job, but it certainly is going to result in some uncomfortable questions. If you have defenses to these charges, you should consult an attorney. Also, the federal government has regulations forbidding so-called "masking," which is defined as plea-bargaining a case to avoid reporting of the offense. An example of "masking" would be pleading guilty to a local ordinance instead of the state law for the sole purpose of avoiding having the offense reported. You are allowed to engage in normal plea-bargaining, since each case has its own risks and defenses, so pleading a charge down from what was accused is allowed. But it is not as simple as it is with non-CDL holders. Finally, a CDL driver can be disqualified from driving if convicted of a "major" offense such as DUI or hit and run, or two "serious" offenses. "Serious" offenses include speeding over 14 miles per hour and other offenses that most people likely do not consider very serious. This means if you simply pay a fine, you could get a notice from DDS that you are disqualified from driving a commercial vehicle. This, in turn, will almost certainly negatively affect your employment status.

We pride ourselves in being fair and honest with our clients. We believe the best way to earn the trust of the community is to do the right thing. When you call our office, you will not be subjected to a sales pitch or a hard sell to get you to retain us. If you do not need an attorney, we will tell you that. Consultations are free, so there is nothing to lose by calling us to discuss your case. I hope you are never charged with any offense that could result in loss of your freedom, driving privileges or ability to earn a living. If you are, I hope you will call us to discuss your case for free.

What To Do After a Car Wreck

Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:00:00 GMT

An automobile accident is a traumatic event, whether you've been badly injured or barely escaped serious injury. How you proceed following a traffic accident can be the difference between recovering the full measure of damages you've suffered and being short-changed.

When you've been injured in a car wreck, there are three basic issues to navigate:

1) Liability

2) Causation

3) Damages

Liability simply means determining who was at fault. If it was you, you cannot recover from the other parties to the accident. If it was the other party, you can recover. As is often the case, if everyone had some level of fault, then the fault ascribed to the other party must be over 50% or you cannot recover (in other words, if you were mostly at fault, Georgia law bars you from recovering any damages). You can only recover the percent of fault ascribed to you, whether in negotiation with the insurance company or following a jury verdict.

Causation means that the negligence of the other party must be the cause of your injuries. If you have Type 1 diabetes, and you are in a car wreck, you cannot make the other person pay for your Type 1 diabetes treatment, because the wreck did not cause your condition. If you have a neck injury or a broken arm or leg, and you did not have a neck injury or a broken arm or leg before the wreck, causation is a much simpler thing to prove. You can only recover for those injuries caused by the accident.

Damages are the compensation you get for being injured. In car wreck cases, this usually takes the form of money paid for property damage, medical bills, pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, lost wages, and similar damages. As above, you can only recover those damages caused by the wreck.

Your actions, or inaction, following a car wreck can often make the difference in whether you can recover the full measure of your damages. If there is significant damage to your vehicle, and you are able, take pictures. If possible, take pictures of the damage to the other vehicle as well. If you are injured too badly to take the photos yourself, be sure a friend or family member, or your attorney, gets out to where the vehicle is stored to take them.

If you are injured, get medical treatment. The single biggest factor in cases we have where clients are less satisfied with their recovery is the failure to get consistent, reasonable medical treatment. Do not treat frivolously -- if you are not hurt, it will not improve your case and you will end up owing money back to a doctor, chiropractor or your health insurance company that you will not recover in the lawsuit. But if you are hurt, get treatment and continue to treat until you are either recovered or as good as you are going to get (which physicians refer to as "maximum medical improvement" or "MMI"). Follow the treatment recommendations of your doctors, and try not to miss appointments for doctor visits or physical therapy.

Keep track of who paid for what. If you go to the emergency room, often they will put a lien on your case. This is a statutory right where the hospital can require you to repay them out of any settlement you obtain. However, if your health insurance company paid the hospital, and they accepted the payment, your attorney can help to reduce or eliminate the lien. If your health insurer paid, they will also want their money back out of any settlement, and in many cases they are legally entitled to it. Keep track of any letters they send to you requesting their money back (called "subrogation" letters). Give your attorney any correspondence from your health insurer. A significant portion of managing an auto accident case is ensuring the client is not stuck paying medical bills or subrogation liens that the attorney should have dealt with when the settlement was disbursed.

When you are through treating, tell your attorney immediately. Often, this means the case is ready to settle. If not, your attorney will need to take next steps so that the case can be postured for a settlement. In Georgia, you have 2 years from the date of accident to either settle or sue. If you fail to secure a settlement, and you do not file suit, your claim will extinguish. It is therefore imperative to ensure that actions are taken to resolve your claim when the opportunity arises, or that action is taken to file suit so that your claim may be heard by a judge or jury.

It is advisable to contact your local attorney as soon as you are in a car wreck. A good attorney is not going to try to push a bad case. We only get paid if we recover money for you or win a lawsuit, so contrary to what some like to say, we do not take frivolous cases. If you are not sure if you need a lawyer, call us. We will tell you all of your options, with no pressure, so that you can make an informed decision.

Workers Comp 101

Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:38:00 GMT

What to know, what to do

A work injury can be a very disruptive event in a person's life. Those most affected are high wage earners who suffer a significant injury. The workers' compensation system is designed to compensate you for just a handful of things:

Medical treatment for up to 400 weeks from the date of injury
Two-thirds of your lost wages, up to a statutory cap (as of this writing in November of 2022, $725.00 per week) if you are completely unable to work, to a maximum of 400 weeks from the date of injury, which is often reduced to 350 weeks from the date of injury if you have work restrictions but are still out of work
Two-thirds of the difference between your pre-injury wages and your post-injury wages if you are able to work light duty but are earning less money than you were before the accident, up to a statutory cap (as of this writing in November of 2022, $483.00 per week), to a maximum of 350 weeks from the date of injury
Permanent impairment
In catastrophic cases, entitlement to weekly benefits and medical treatment may be extended past the 350/400 week caps

I will discuss each of these in more detail below. First, however, I would like to discuss the system, and particularly the fact that the workers comp system is a compromise. It is not designed for you to get ahead. It is not even designed for you to break even. It is designed for you to lose. Therefore, maximizing the compensation you are entitled to is paramount.
The Georgia Worker's Compensation Act, like most state worker's comp schemes, is a compromise. It is a no fault system. You do not have to prove your employer did anything wrong in order to receive compensation. All you have to show is that you were inured in an accident arising out of and in the course of your employment, and that no defenses apply. Defenses include intoxication, willful misconduct, and other defenses such as your employer was not subject to the Worker's Compensation Act or you were not an employee at the time. Defenses are beyond the scope of this article, but I do want to note that not every work injury is a valid worker's comp case.
In exchange for not having to prove liability on the part of your employer, you give up the right to sue the employer in court. The worker's comp system is your only remedy. You give up the right to recover for pain and suffering, or the full measure of your lost wages. You give up the right to treat with a doctor of your choosing except in certain limited circumstances. You give up the right to have your case heard by a jury. You cannot recover non-economic damages such as loss of enjoyment of life. The compromise works both ways. The employer has to pay you even if they did nothing wrong, and you have to accept the benefits the system allows with no ability to recover a full measure of your damages outside the worker's comp system.
Assuming you are an employee and your employer is subject to the Act, when you are injured in an accident arising out of and in the course of your employment, your employer is supposed to provide you with medical treatment immediately. This is usually done by having you choose a physician from the employer's "posted panel of physicians." The panel is required to be posted in prominent places, and in return you are required to choose a doctor from the panel for treatment. There are limited exceptions to this for emergency treatment or if the panel is invalid; however, in most cases you will be required to treat with one of several doctors the employer chooses. If you have questions about whether the employer's panel is valid, or which doctor you should choose for your injury, do not hesitate to call us. We will be happy to assist you in making a good choice.
If the doctor treating you, called the "Authorized Treating Physician" or "ATP," says you cannot work, or has you on light duty that the employer cannot accommodate, the employer and insurer are required to commence Temporary Total Disability ("TTD") benefits. This will be two-thirds of your average weekly wage (calculated as the average of the 13 weeks pre-injury, with certain exceptions), up to a maximum of $725.00 per week as of the date of this writing. Benefits must be started within 21 days of the injury, and you are not entitled to benefits for the first week of disability unless you remain out of work for more than 3 weeks, at which point the first week becomes due. If you are able to work light duty and your employer has light duty work, you will only receive benefits if you are earning less money than you were pre-injury. This is called Temporary Partial Disability ("TPD"). This is two-thirds of the difference between your pre-injury wage and your post-injury wage, up to a maximum of $483.00 per week as of the date of this writing. This is payable until such time as you earn more than your pre-injury wages, or alternatively are returned to work "full duty with no restrictions."
Your doctor may assign an "impairment rating." In Georgia this must be calculated according to the 5th Edition AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment . This benefit is called Permanent Partial Disability ("PPD"), and will be a percent rating, paid at your TTD rate, against any of several scheduled body parts (fingers, hand, arm, leg, eye, etc.), or to the body as a whole. When there are multiple ratings to different body parts, you recover all of them. For example, if you have a 5% rating to the arm, the upper extremity is rated at 225 weeks. So you multiply 225 times 5 percent, and the result is you are entitled to 11.25 weeks of benefits at your TTD rate. If the rating is done multiple ways (to the finger, to the hand, to the arm and to the body as a whole), you generally get the calculation that pays you the most money. PPD is the only compensation you get for permanent injury. As noted above, there is no recovery for pain and suffering or loss of enjoyment of life.
In a catastrophic claim, the caps may be extended. Catastrophic claims are an article unto themselves, but briefly, there are several situations such as paralysis, loss of a certain percent of sight or hearing, certain amputations, that are automatically catastrophic. There is also a "catch all" provision that states if you are unable to do your past work or any work available in substantial numbers in the national economy, your case can be designated as catastrophic. Catastrophic claims are incredibly complex, and should not be undertaken without the assistance of an attorney.
As you can see, the workers' compensation system is very complex and in many cases very subjective. Your employer and insurer may believe they have defenses that do not apply, or may believe your benefits should be calculated one way when the law requires them to be calculated in a way that might net you more benefits. Having an experienced worker's comp attorney on your side can make the difference between recovering all the benefits to which the law entitles you, or recovering less. Since the system is already a compromise, this is unacceptable. If you have questions about your worker's comp case, call us today!

Do I Even Need A Lawyer?

Wed, 16 Nov 2022 15:42:00 GMT

How to know, and who to trust.

One of the first comments I hear frequently when potential clients call my office is "I'm not sure if I even need a lawyer for this." And that is understandable. While some issues are complex and not easily navigated by laypeople, others are simple and do not require an attorney. Knowing the difference is important, and the good news is, I will tell you. I pride myself on honesty and integrity, and I will not accept your case if you will be better off without my involvement.
Some firms will sign you up, file their fee agreement or accept your fee or written promise to pay a fee, and begin the process of handling the claim without regard to whether this is the best thing for you and your case. I will not. I analyze every case on its own merits, and I advise potential clients on how to proceed in the event hiring a lawyer is not in their best interest at this time. I frequently turn away cases because my involvement will only complicate the situation. The reason is simple and two-fold. First, I do what is right for our clients, always. I tell potential clients frequently "I do not want you to be worse off because you hired me." Second, it is good business. While I love getting new cases and being able to earn fees on my work, I do not want a reputation in the community for signing and churning files and taking fees on cases that end up harming my clients. Because I live and work here, I have to look you in the eye, and I have to live with the reputation my actions warrant.
A few examples. Say you have a worker's comp case, and the employer is working with you on limited duty work, and the insurer is paying what they owe and sending you to the doctor. If your injury is minor and you would prefer to keep your job, you probably do not need an attorney. So long as your insurer is doing what they are supposed to do and your employer is treating you fairly, you may be better off without my help. I will tell you that.
Another example. Say you have three traffic citations, one for too fast for conditions, one for speeding 14 miles per hour over the speed limit, and a third for an expired tag. All of these citations result in zero points on your license. Unless you are a commercial driver, where the cumulative violations are reportable and can affect your qualifications to drive commercial vehicles and earn a living, you are probably better off working with the solicitor to get the best deal you can. All of these citations result in zero points on your license, and are non-reportable for Georgia resident license holders who are not commercial license holders. Even if you pay me to represent you, the outcome will still be zero points, non-reportable for a Georgia non-commercial license holder. The only difference is, I will have more money and you will have less. If you call me with those facts, I will tell you that. Paying us to obtain an outcome you could obtain yourself only helps me in the very short term. Once clients begin to figure out their lawyer is fleecing them, it will only hurt me in the long run. So I don't do it, because it isn't worth it.
Other cases are more complicated. Say you have a workers' compensation claim and the employer has returned you to work "light duty," but is not complying with your work restrictions, and they are not providing you medical treatment you need to get better. In most cases, you need a lawyer to help with this. If your employer and its worker's comp insurer are not playing by the rules early, the likelihood they will play by the rules later on is pretty slim. Or suppose you have a car wreck case where you were injured, but the insurance company for the at-fault driver is telling you they assess a certain percentage of fault to you. Some insurers do this as a matter of course. It is possible hiring an attorney will result in you getting less of a recovery because even with the reduced percentage, the attorney's fee will be more than what you are giving up. But more often, an attorney can help maximize your recovery by ensuring that all elements of damages are accounted for, and by ensuring that your medical records and billings are properly submitted to show a fuller picture of your injuries and damages.
There are, of course, obvious cases. If your workers' compensation claim is denied, you will not usually convince an insurance adjuster to change his or her mind without an attorney to assist you. Often, claim denials are valid. In my experience, at least as often they are based on one-sided and self-serving readings of the law. Or say you are charged with driving on a suspended license, or DUI. These are charges that are not easily navigable without an attorney's help. Or perhaps you have been in a car wreck with significant property damage and bodily injury. Knowing how to navigate the at-fault driver's policy limits, your health insurer's subrogation rights, and maximize your recovery without getting into more legal trouble is not something that is within the expertise of most laypeople. I will tell you that, too.
Trust is important to me. When you call my office, I will discuss every aspect of your case with you and help you make an informed decision as to whether hiring me is in your best interest. Ultimately, the decision to hire an attorney is yours. I will give you all of the information you need to make a good decision.

Why You Should Hire a Local Lawyer

Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:33:00 GMT

Personalized service, personal attention, accountability

When I started this firm in 2014 in Dallas, Georgia, I had a clear vision of what I wanted it to be. The most important part of that vision is I wanted to ensure that every one of my clients is personally represented by me, and not shuffled off to a paralegal or intake specialist or case manager. When you hire a lawyer, you ought to get a lawyer.
Too many firms, especially larger firms or the "big advertisers," follow the other model. They want to get you in the door, sign you up, and shuffle you off. If you get tired of not being able to talk to your lawyer, they will simply put a lien on your file and collect from your new attorney when you decide to hire a lawyer who does pay attention to you and your case. This not only harms you, because it robs you of proper legal representation during the time you are being serviced by a paralegal or case manager. It also harms your new attorney, who is working on your case and is giving you personal attention and ensuring that your case is given proper priority. It requires that new attorney to give a portion of his or her fee to the attorney whose office rushed you to sign up and then did not properly represent you, or to litigate over the old attorney's entitlement to a lien.
In making a decision to hire a lawyer, ask yourself some questions. Have you met the attorney who will be handling your case? Do you trust him or her? Do you feel like your interests are being considered? Conversely, have you only met with an "intake specialist" but never spoken with an actual attorney? Are you being pushed to sign paperwork binding you to pay an attorney you haven't met or spoken with when your case settles? Do you feel like you are being shuffled through a process or entering into a relationship with someone who is going to advocate on your behalf?
At Garner Law Office, we take great pride in providing personal service. You will only deal with me and my assistant. You will meet with me to discuss your case and weigh your options. You will not be one of many "files" in my office, but you will be a valuable client and, hopefully, a friend. We work and live in the community so we can serve the community. That means you, the client, are not only a commodity and revenue stream to us. You are also our neighbor, and we will treat you as such.