City of Waycross v. Holmes, 532 S.E.2d 90 (Ga. 2000). · Go Syfert
City of Waycross v. Holmes, 532 S.E.2d 90 (Ga. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
37 citation events (34 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Frett v. State Farm Emp. Workers' Comp. (gactapp, 2018-11-02)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Frett v. State Farm Emp. Workers' Comp. (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2018 · signal: see · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence high
the workers' compensation act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Rochele Frett v. State Farm Employee Workers' Compensation (2×) also: Cited "see"
Ga. Ct. App. · 2018 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the workers' compensation act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.
cited Cited as authority (rule) gand 2026
N.D. Ga. · 2026 · confidence medium
It should be “liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.” (quoting , 272 Ga. 488, 489 (2000) (quotations omitted)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Savannah Hospitality Services, LLC v. James H. Scriven
Ga. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
“The Workers’ Compensation Act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.” (Citation omitted.) City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000); see also OCGA § 34-9-23.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) The Avrett Plumbing Co. v. Marlon Castillo (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
There is no dispute that Castillo was off work and was not “on-call” at the time of his injury. 2 “The Workers’ Compensation Act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.” (Citation omitted.) City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Willie Barnes v. Roseburg Forest Products Co
Ga. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Roseburg Forest/ACE American has filed a brief as appellee regarding the 2009 injury (fictional new accident). 6 OCGA § 34-9-104 (a). 7 (Emphasis supplied.) 8 See OCGA § 34-9-200.1 (i) (in pertinent part, permitting a party to request a new determination as to the catastrophic or noncatastrophic nature of the employee’s injury). 9 City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000) (citation omitted); see Ray Bell Constr.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ray Bell Construction Co. v. King
Ga. · 2007 · confidence medium
It is “a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.” City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Footstar, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
Ga. · 2006 · confidence medium
“The Workers’ Compensation Act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose. [Cit.]” City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Footstar, Inc. v. Stevens
Ga. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
Of course, the present case is governed by the most recent incarnation of the statute; however, we are mindful that “[t]he Workers’ Compensation Act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose.” (Citation omitted.) City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Glisson v. Rooms To Go
Ga. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
For example, in concluding that OCGA § 34-9-243 (b) did not allow credit for retirement benefits, “regardless of whether such benefits are paid in the ordinary course of retirement, or for an early retirement brought on by disability,” the Supreme Court of Georgia held that “the intent of the statute was to enable an employer to take credit for payments received by the employee only pursuant to an employer funded disability plan, wage continuation plan, or disability insurance policy.” City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) McCarty v. Pride
Ga. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
But Dr. Wrobel disputed Delta Pride’s premise that “malaria is an ordinary disease of life for anyone who resides in Belize.” Instead, Dr. Wrobel agreed only that people living in Belize are “susceptible to it.” City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
cited Cited as authority (rule) City of Atlanta v. Arnold
Ga. Ct. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
City of Way cross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority v. Thompson (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (Marta) v. Kathy Thompson (2×)
Ga. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See City of Waycross v. Holmes, 272 Ga. 488, 489 ( 532 SE2d 90 ) (2000).
City of Waycross
v.
Holmes
S00A0752.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jun 12, 2000.
532 S.E.2d 90
Walker & Sweat, Bruce M. Walker, Shawn F. Wildes, for appellant., Hackel & Hackel, Thomas M. Hackel, for appellee., George, Bartles & Wallach, Alex B. Wallach, amicus curiae.
Thompson.
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published
1 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 74%
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Georgia (3)
Thompson, Justice.

At issue is whether an employer can take credit for disability retirement payments when it calculates and pays workers’ compensation benefits. More specifically, we are asked to decide whether OCGA § 34-9-243 (b), which allows credit for a “disability plan,” allows credit for a “disability retirement” plan as well. [1]

[*489] Holmes, a City employee, was injured and awarded workers’ compensation benefits in September 1996. In May 1997, Holmes was awarded Social Security disability benefits. Two months later, he was awarded disability benefits from the City’s retirement plan.

At a hearing on May 7, 1998, the City sought credit against workers’ compensation obligations for the retirement benefits paid to Holmes. The ALJ held that the City’s retirement plan provides disability benefits to employees based on the state of their health; that the City’s plan is a disability plan under OCGA § 34-9-243 (b); and that, therefore, the City was entitled to the credit. On appeal, the Appellate Division of the State Board of Workers’ Compensation reversed, finding that a “disability retirement plan” is not covered under OCGA § 34-9-243 (b).

The City appealed to the Ware County Superior Court. Because the superior court did not enter a dispositive order within 20 days, the Board’s decision was affirmed by operation of law. After the City’s application for a discretionary appeal was denied by the Court of Appeals, the City sought, and this Court granted, review.

In construing a statute, a primary rule is that the courts must try to ascertain the purpose and intent of the legislature and then try to construe the law to implement that intent. Hollowell v. Jove, 247 Ga. 678, 681 (279 SE2d 430) (1981); Wilson v. Board of Regents, 246 Ga. 649, 650 (272 SE2d 496) (1980). The Workers’ Compensation Act is a humanitarian measure which should be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose. Samuel v. Baitcher, 247 Ga. 71, 73 (274 SE2d 327) (1981). Construing OCGA § 34-9-243 (b) liberally, we conclude that it was not meant to allow credit for retirement benefits, regardless of whether such benefits are paid in the ordinary course of retirement, or for an early retirement brought on by disability. On the contrary, the intent of the statute was to enable an employer to take credit for payments received by the employee only pursuant to an employer funded disability plan, wage continuation plan, or disability insurance policy. See Ga. Forestry Comm. v. Taylor, 241 Ga. App. 151, 153 (526 SE2d 373) (1999) (purpose of Code section is to ensure that employee is not unjustly enriched by doubling up on payments). See also Grantland G. King III, in Legislative Review, 9 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 285, 291 (1992) (intent of OCGA § 34-9-243 (b) is to “allow[ ] the employer to reduce insurance costs by using the proceeds from any general disability policy which it has funded to reduce the need for benefits under a workers’ compensation policy.”).

[*490] Decided June 12, 2000. Walker & Sweat, Bruce M. Walker, Shawn F. Wildes, for appellant. Hackel & Hackel, Thomas M. Hackel, for appellee. George, Bartles & Wallach, Alex B. Wallach, amicus curiae.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.
1

OCGA § 34-9-243 (b) reads in pertinent part:

[T]he employer’s obligation to pay or cause to be paid weekly benefits under Code Section 34-9-261 [total disability] or 34-9-262 [temporary partial disability] shall be reduced by the employer funded portion of payments received or being received by[*489] the employee pursuant to a disability plan, a wage continuation plan, or from a disability insurance policy established ... by the same employer from whom benefits . . . are claimed.

(Emphasis supplied.)