Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Georgia opinions name it 1 courts 1993–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Department of Administrative Services v. Browngreen2 sentences2016Srvs. v. Brown, 219 Ga. App. 27, 28 ( 464 SE2d 7 ) (1995) (suggesting that use of a special verdict form serves the interests of intervening workers’ compensation carriers). 21 See Hammond, 244 Ga. App. at 866 (noting that “[i]n phase two, the issue was whether [the workers’ compensation carrier] was entitled to a subrogation lien pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b) against the amounts recovered by [plaintiff] in phase one”). 22 Id. at 868 (4); see also N. Bros. 2016Srvs. v. Brown, 219 Ga. App. 27, 28 ( 464 SE2d 7 ) (1995) (suggesting that use of a special verdict form serves the interests of intervening workers’ compensation carriers). 21 See Hammond, 244 Ga. App. at 866 (noting that “[i]n phase two, the issue was whether [the workers’ compensation carrier] was entitled to a subrogation lien pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b) against the amounts recovered by [plaintiff] in phase one”). 22 Id. at 868 (4); see also N. Bros. | 4 | 4 |
Anthem Casualty Insurance v. Murraygreen2 sentences2016Co. v. Murray, 246 Ga. App. 778, 782 (2) ( 542 SE2d 171 ) (2000) (“The right of an employer or insurer to seek subrogation under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 is not absolute.”); N. Bros. 2016Co. v. Murray, 246 Ga. App. 778, 782 (2) ( 542 SE2d 171 ) (2000) (“The right of an employer or insurer to seek subrogation under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 is not absolute.”); N. Bros. | 3 | 3 |
North Bros. Co. v. Thomasgreen2 sentences2016Co. v. Thomas, 236 Ga.App. 839, 839-40 ( 513 SE2d 251 ) (1999) (“OCGA § 34-9-11.1, which provides a limited right of subrogation to workers’ compensation providers, was enacted in 1995. 2016Co. v. Thomas, 236 Ga.App. 839, 839-40 ( 513 SE2d 251 ) (1999) (“OCGA § 34-9-11.1, which provides a limited right of subrogation to workers’ compensation providers, was enacted in 1995. | 3 | 3 |
Hammond v. Leegreen2 sentences2016See Hammond, 244 Ga. App. at 866 (noting that “[i]n phase two, the issue was whether [the workers’ compensation carrier] was entitled to a subrogation lien pursuant to OCGA §34-9-11.1 (b) against the amounts recovered by [plaintiff] in phase one”). 2016Srvs. v. Brown, 219 Ga. App. 27, 28 ( 464 SE2d 7 ) (1995) (suggesting that use of a special verdict form serves the interests of intervening workers’ compensation carriers). 21 See Hammond, 244 Ga. App. at 866 (noting that “[i]n phase two, the issue was whether [the workers’ compensation carrier] was entitled to a subrogation lien pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b) against the amounts recovered by [plaintiff] in phase one”). 22 Id. at 868 (4); see also N. Bros. | 2 | 2 |
City of Warner Robins v. Bakergreen2 sentences2013According to the court, Travelers’ absolute right to intervene in Patrick’s lawsuit against AG, pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b), necessarily encompassed a right to participate in mediation and settlement negotiations between those parties.11 The court explained that, if Travelers had no opportunity to participate in the negotiations and, thus, to influence the terms of the settlement in a manner that would protect its statutory subrogation lien, its absolute right to intervene would be rendered “futile, unenforceable, and ineffectual.” Further, if Patrick and AG were allowed to extinguish Tra 2013See City of Warner Robins v. Baker, 255 Ga. App. at 603 (2) (acknowledging that an employer or insurer with a subrogation lien under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b) “has an absolute right to intervene in both trials and settlement negotiations”). | 2 | 2 |
Johnson v. Comcar Industries, Inc.green2 sentences2007See Johnson v. Comcar Indus., 252 Ga. App. 625, 626 ( 556 SE2d 148 ) (2001) (“OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b) plainly provides the employer or insurer a right of subrogation limited to benefits paid under the Georgia Workers’ Compensation Act.”). 2007See Johnson v. Comcar Indus., 252 Ga. App. 625, 626 ( 556 SE2d 148 ) (2001) (“OCGA § 34-9-11.1 (b) plainly provides the employer or insurer a right of subrogation limited to benefits paid under the Georgia Workers’ Compensation Act.”). | 1 | 1 |
Government Employees Insurance Company v. Hirshgreen2 sentences1998Co. v. Hirsh, 211 Ga. App. 374, 375 ( 439 SE2d 59 ) (1993) (subrogation lien under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 attaches to injured party’s recovery against negligent third party). 1998Co. v. Hirsh, 211 Ga. App. 374, 375 ( 439 SE2d 59 ) (1993) (subrogation lien under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 attaches to injured party’s recovery against negligent third party). | 1 | 1 |
PROFESSIONAL CARPET SYSTEMS, INC. v. Saefkowgreen2 sentences1998See Professional Carpet Systems v. Saefkow, 212 Ga. App. 131 ( 441 SE2d 98 ) (1994). 1998See Professional Carpet Systems v. Saefkow, 212 Ga. App. 131 ( 441 SE2d 98 ) (1994). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
CGU Insurance v. Sabel Industries, Inc.
green
1 sentence2004Co. v. Sabel Indus., supra, 255 Ga. App. at 238-241 , and because CGU had no right under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 to assert a lien for future workers’ compensation benefits not yet paid to Mr. Harrison. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Mikart, Inc. v. Marquez
green
2 sentences1998The record indicates that Auto-Owners counterclaimed to protect and enforce “a subrogation lien against any recovery obtained by Plaintiff from Defendant Wilson pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-11.1.” At all pertinent times, Auto-Owners asserted that it had a subrogation right under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 to the insurance payment Stewart received from Cincinnati. 2 Compare Mikart, Inc. v. Marquez, 211 Ga. App. 209 (1) ( 438 SE2d 633 ) (1993) (dismissal of action for declaratory judgment proper where plaintiff cannot show position of uncertainty as to an alleged right). 1998The record indicates that Auto-Owners counterclaimed to protect and enforce “a subrogation lien against any recovery obtained by Plaintiff from Defendant Wilson pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-11.1.” At all pertinent times, Auto-Owners asserted that it had a subrogation right under OCGA § 34-9-11.1 to the insurance payment Stewart received from Cincinnati. 2 Compare Mikart, Inc. v. Marquez, 211 Ga. App. 209 (1) ( 438 SE2d 633 ) (1993) (dismissal of action for declaratory judgment proper where plaintiff cannot show position of uncertainty as to an alleged right). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Carter v. Banks
green
1 sentence1993However, GEICO fails to cite any statute or decision of this court or the Supreme Court that would authorize overturning the principle set forth in Wrightsman and approved in Carter v. Banks, supra. Decided November 29, 1993 Reconsideration denied December 14, 1993 Edward M. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.