From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hartford Accident c. Co. v. Bristol

Supreme Court of Georgia
Sep 28, 1978
248 S.E.2d 661 (Ga. 1978)

Summary

In Hartford Acc. Indem. Co. v. Bristol, 242 Ga. 287, 288 (248 S.E.2d 661) (1978) and Gilmer v. Atlanta Housing Auth., 170 Ga. App. 326, 327 (316 S.E.2d 535) (1984), the evidence showed that the employees had made sincere albeit unsuccessful efforts to secure "suitable employment" elsewhere following their termination.

Summary of this case from Evco Plastics v. Burton

Opinion

33822.

ARGUED SEPTEMBER 11, 1978.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 28, 1978.

Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia — 145 Ga. App. 796 ( 245 S.E.2d 7) (1978).

Blackburn, Bright Dodd, J. Converse Bright, for appellants. Dane Perkins, for appellee.


Certiorari was granted to resolve the conflict between Brown v. Gulf Ins. Co., 141 Ga. App. 819 ( 234 S.E.2d 552) (1977), and Hartford Acc. c. Co. v. Bristol, 145 Ga. App. 796 ( 245 S.E.2d 7) (1978).

Code Ann. § 114-709, as amended in 1968 and as applicable in the present case, provides in relevant part that "Notwithstanding any court decisions previously rendered construing this section, `change in condition,' as used herein insofar as it relates to section[s] 114-404 and 114-405 shall mean solely an economic change in condition occasioned by the employee's ... inability to work or continue to work for [the] same or any other employer, which inability is proximately caused by the accidental injury." See Ga. L. 1978, pp. 2220, 2233, for the amendment to § 114-709 that was effective July 1, 1978.

The statutory test for "change in condition" under Code Ann. § 114-709, as amended in 1968, is "economic condition" proximately caused by previous accidental injury rather than medical or physical condition. Jenkins Enterprises v. Williams, 122 Ga. App. 840 ( 178 S.E.2d 926) (1970). "Thus, even though a claimant's physical condition may have remained unchanged, a change in his earning capacity predicated upon the accidental injury is considered a change in condition." Miller v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 136 Ga. App. 101 ( 220 S.E.2d 89) (1975). Therefore, the cases of Roland v. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co., 133 Ga. App. 442 ( 211 S.E.2d 395) (1974), Miller v. Argonaut Ins. Co., supra, and Brown v. Gulf Ins. Co., 141 Ga. App. 819 ( 234 S.E.2d 552) (1977), are specifically disapproved and will not be followed to the extent that they say or hold that a claimant must show during a proceeding brought under Code Ann. § 114-709, as amended in 1968, that his medical or physical condition has "changed for the worse."

In the present case the claimant sustained a compensated back injury. After medical treatment, he returned to work with the same employer, performing less strenuous duties. Thereafter, he was laid off after his employer no longer had any work for any of his employees, including the claimant. He was required by Code Ann. § 114-709, as amended in 1968, to show that his inability to secure suitable employment elsewhere was proximately caused by his previous accidental injury. To the extent that the decisions of the Court of Appeals in Hartford Acc. c. Co. v. Bristol, 145 Ga. App. 796 ( 245 S.E.2d 7) (1978), and in St. Paul Fire c. Ins. Co. v. Lee, 142 Ga. App. 233 ( 235 S.E.2d 659) (1977), might be read as excusing the claimant from the foregoing burden of proof, they are specifically disapproved and will not be followed.

In the present case the record contains some probative evidence that the claimant made a sincere effort to secure suitable employment elsewhere. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. Howard Sheppard, Inc. v. McGowan, 137 Ga. App. 408 ( 224 S.E.2d 65) (1976).

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Bowles, J., who is disqualified.


ARGUED SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 28, 1978.


Summaries of

Hartford Accident c. Co. v. Bristol

Supreme Court of Georgia
Sep 28, 1978
248 S.E.2d 661 (Ga. 1978)

In Hartford Acc. Indem. Co. v. Bristol, 242 Ga. 287, 288 (248 S.E.2d 661) (1978) and Gilmer v. Atlanta Housing Auth., 170 Ga. App. 326, 327 (316 S.E.2d 535) (1984), the evidence showed that the employees had made sincere albeit unsuccessful efforts to secure "suitable employment" elsewhere following their termination.

Summary of this case from Evco Plastics v. Burton
Case details for

Hartford Accident c. Co. v. Bristol

Case Details

Full title:HARTFORD ACCIDENT INDEMNITY COMPANY et al. v. BRISTOL

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: Sep 28, 1978

Citations

248 S.E.2d 661 (Ga. 1978)
248 S.E.2d 661

Citing Cases

McEver v. Worrell Enterprises

Maloney, supra at 828. Maloney confirmed the rule in Hartford Accident c. Co. v. Bristol, 242 Ga. 287 ( 248…

Insurance Company of North America v. Yates

After appellee returned to work following a disabling back injury, he was terminated from employment, due to…