Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 46-3-40 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 46-3-40 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 46-3-40

TITLE 46 PUBLIC UTILITIES AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Section 3. Electrical Service, 46-3-1 through 46-3-541.

ARTICLE 1 GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTRICITY GENERALLY

46-3-40. Criminal penalty; strict liability for injury or damage; indemnification; liability for cost of delay.

  1. Any person responsible for the work who violates any of the provisions of this part shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be liable for a fine of $1,000.00 for a first offense and $3,000.00 for a second or subsequent offense.
  2. Any person responsible for the work who violates the requirements of Code Section 46-3-33 and whose subsequent activities within the vicinity of high-voltage lines result in damage to utility facilities or result in injury or damage to person or property shall be strictly liable for said injury or damage.Any such person shall also indemnify the owner or operator of such high-voltage lines against all claims, if any, for personal injury, including death, property damage, or service interruptions, including costs incurred in defending any such claims resulting from work in violation of Code Section 46-3-33.
  3. In the event the owner or operator of the high-voltage line fails to effect the safeguards required by Code Section 46-3-33 within a reasonable time after notice is given and appropriate arrangements are made pursuant to Code Section 46-3-34, such owner or operator shall be liable for the reasonable costs incurred by any such delay.

(Ga. L. 1960, p. 181, § 7; Code 1981, §46-3-39; Code 1981, §46-3-40, as redesignated by Ga. L. 1992, p. 2141, § 1.)

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Workers' compensation exclusive remedy provisions.

- The workers' compensation exclusive remedy provisions of O.C.G.A. § 34-9-11(a) bar the express indemnity provisions of the High-voltage Safety Act, O.C.G.A. § 46-3-40(b). Georgia Power Co. v. Franco Remodeling Co., 233 Ga. App. 640, 505 S.E.2d 488 (1998).

The indemnity provision of the High-voltage Safety Act (O.C.G.A. § 46-3-30 et seq.) can be enforced without offending the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act. Georgia Power Co. v. Franco Remodeling Co., 240 Ga. App. 771, 525 S.E.2d 152 (1999), vacating Georgia Power Co. v. Franco Remodeling Co., 233 Ga. App. 640, 505 S.E.2d 488 (1998).

Indemnity actions pursuant to HVSA.

- The indemnity provision of the High Voltage safety Act (HVSA) may be enforced without offending the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act by according indemnity actions pursuant to the HVSA the same dignity case law has given contractual indemnity provisions executed by private parties. The HVSA authorizes a power line owner or operator to obtain indemnification from an employer on account of the employer's failure to abide by the safety provisions in the HVSA. Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Constr. Co., 270 Ga. 464, 511 S.E.2d 160 (1999).

Where a power line owner established that a subcontractor was a "person responsible for the work" that failed to give notice to the owner or a utilities protection center that work was being performed within 10 feet of the high-voltage line, the subcontractor was liable to the owner on its claim for defense costs. Georgia Power Co. v. Franco Remodeling Co., 240 Ga. App. 771, 525 S.E.2d 152 (1999).

Purpose of O.C.G.A. § 46-3-40(b), allowing a power company to pursue an indemnity action against an employer whose workers were injured by contact with high voltage power lines because the workers failed to notify the power company of the work, was to prevent injury, a legitimate legislative purpose, and the purpose was served because the threat of an indemnity action would motivate employers to follow the notice requirement and thereby prevent accidents. Therefore, the statute did not violate substantive due process. Glass Sys. v. Ga. Power Co., 288 Ga. 85, 703 S.E.2d 605 (2010).

Cited in Savannah Elec. & Power Co. v. Holton, 127 Ga. App. 447, 193 S.E.2d 866 (1972).

PART 3 S ALE OF ELECTRICITY BY FACILITY GENERATING ELECTRICITY, STEAM, OR OTHER FORMS OF ENERGY FOR ITS OWN CONSUMPTION

Law reviews.

- For article surveying recent legislative and judicial developments in zoning, planning and environmental law, see 31 Mercer L. Rev. 89 (1979).

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 46-3-40

Total Results: 2  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Constr. Co., 511 S.E.2d 160 (Ga. 1999).

Cited 17 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jan 11, 1999 | 270 Ga. 464, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 247

...Lee received benefits under the Workers' Compensation Act (WCA), OCGA § 34-9-1 et seq. He and his wife thereafter filed suit against Flint for personal injury and loss of consortium. Flint sought indemnification from the construction company pursuant to OCGA § 46-3-40(b) of the High Voltage Safety Act (HVSA), OCGA § 46-3-30 et seq., which provides that an entity operating within the vicinity of high-voltage lines is strictly liable for resulting injuries and must indemnify the power-line owner against suit....
...Because such actions are based upon a contractual relationship between the employer and a third party, contractual indemnity *162 actions are distinguishable from indemnity and contribution actions filed by employees "on account of" injury or death. OCGA § 34-9-11(a). In OCGA § 46-3-40 of the HVSA, the Legislature enacted a legislative indemnity provision which applies to any party who, while working within ten feet of any high-voltage line in this State, failed under OCGA § 46-3-33 to notify the utilities protection center and/or await the taking of appropriate safeguarding action by the power-line owner. As set forth in OCGA § 46-3-40(b), any party who violates these statutory safety precautions "shall also indemnify the owner or operator of such high-voltage lines against all claims, if any, for personal injury ......
...Thus, while the WCA remains an employee's sole remedy against an employer on account of a work-related injury, OCGA § 34-9-11(a), the HVSA authorizes a power-line company to obtain indemnification from an employer on account of the employer's failure to abide by the safety provisions in the HVSA. OCGA § 46-3-40(b)....
Copy

Glass Sys., Inc. v. Georgia Power Co., 703 S.E.2d 605 (Ga. 2010).

Cited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 1, 2010 | 288 Ga. 85, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 3465

...fety Act (HVSA). [2] The two workers sued appellee for claims related to their injuries, but did not prevail. See Dalton v. 933 Peachtree, L.P., 291 Ga.App. 123, 661 S.E.2d 156 (2008). Appellee then filed an indemnity action, as provided for by OCGA § 46-3-40(b), [3] against appellant to recover its costs, including legal fees, in defending itself against appellant's employees. In response to appellee's motion for partial summary judgment, appellant alleged that OCGA § 46-3-40(b) was unconstitutional....
...Smith, 276 Ga. 208, 209-210, 576 S.E.2d 878 (2003) (power line owner is not liable if not given prior notice of work performed near power lines). Because of this determination by the Court of Appeals, appellee filed the instant action pursuant to OCGA § 46-3-40(b) for indemnity against appellant. 1. Appellant alleges that OCGA § 46-3-40(b) is unconstitutional to the extent it violates due process by failing to require appellee to give appellant notice of the employees' liability action against appellee; by failing to allow appellant to defend appellee in the employees' un...
...The statute also does not deny appellant procedural due process, i.e., the right to notice and hearing. [4] Appellant's contentions regarding its access to the employees' underlying action for injuries have no bearing on the constitutionality of the indemnity provision set forth in OCGA § 46-3-40(b) because it is an entirely separate cause of action stemming from the notice requirements of the HVSA and not the employees' cause of action in tort....
...ging the amount and reasonableness of the costs and fees allegedly incurred by appellee during the employees' lawsuit. Thus, appellant has not in fact been denied notice and the right to be heard on the matter of indemnity. 2. Appellant alleges OCGA § 46-3-40(b) is unconstitutional to the extent it violates equal protection by treating appellant differently from employers whose employees have not been injured in high voltage accidents....
...he is similarly situated to members of a class who are treated differently than he." Drew v. State, 285 Ga. 848(2), 684 S.E.2d 608 (2009). Thus, appellant's equal protection claim is not viable and the trial court did not err when it determined OCGA § 46-3-40(b) does not violate appellant's right to equal protection....
...OCGA § 46-3-34(b) provides in pertinent part: "Where work is to be done, the person responsible for such work shall give notice to the utilities protection center during its regular business hours at least 72 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, prior to commencing such work...." [2] OCGA § 46-3-30 et seq. [3] OCGA § 46-3-40(b) provides as follows: Any person responsible for the work who violates the requirements of Code Section 46-3-33 and whose subsequent activities within the vicinity of high-voltage lines result in damage to utility facilities or result in...