O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 34-9-2.1 (2019)

Exemption of corporate officers; limitation

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A corporate officer or a member of a limited liability company who elects to be exempt from coverage under this chapter shall make such election by giving written certification to the insurer or, if there is no insurer, to the State Board of Workers’ Compensation. The right of any corporation or limited liability company to exempt its officers or members from coverage under this chapter is limited as follows: (1) A corporation shall not be allowed to exempt more than five corporate officers and a limited liability company shall not be allowed to exempt more than five members; and (2) In order for the written certification of exemption to be in effect, the corporate officer must be identified by name as well as by the office held at the time of certification and the member of the limited liability company must be identified by name; and (3) Any employer subject to this chapter pursuant to subsection (a) of Code Section 34-9-2 before the filing of any exemptions shall

remain subject to this chapter without regard to the number of exemptions filed. However, in the event that there shall be no covered employees once exemptions are elected, no coverage shall be required unless and until additional employees are employed. (b) A corporate officer or a member of the limited liability company who has exempted himself or herself by proper certification from coverage under this chapter may at any time revoke such exemption and thereby accept coverage under this chapter by giving certification to such effect in the same manner as provided in subsection (a) of this Code section relative to exemption from coverage. (c) No certification given pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) of this Code section shall become effective until it is filed with the proper entity.

History

(Code 1933, § 114-201, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 2360, § 2; Code 1981, § 34-9-2.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 2360, § 4; Ga. L. 1988, p. 1679, § 1; Ga. L. 1995, p. 642, § 1; Ga. L. 1996, p. 1291, § 3.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Employees covered under this chapter generally, § 34-9-1.

Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 1995, p. 642, § 13, not codified by the General Assembly, provides for severability.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Exemptions by corporate officers are ineffective to reduce the employee count for determining applicability of the Workers’ Compensation Act, O.C.G.A. § 34-9-1 et seq., except when the exemptions reduce the employee count to zero. Once an ‘‘additional employee’’ is hired, corporate officers must be included in the

total employee count regardless of whether they are personally exempt from the act. Hitchcock v. Jack Wiggins, Inc., 249 Ga. App. 845, 549 S.E.2d 806 (2001). Cited in Chandler v. Hancock Bldrs., Inc., 205 Ga. App. 303, 422 S.E.2d 206 (1992).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1986–2001 · leading case: Guinn v. Conwood Corp., 363 S.E.2d 271 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Guinn v. Conwood Corp., 363 S.E.2d 271 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “1 Despite the argument that there is no opt-out provision left in the law, thus making the *45 Slaten rationale passe, new OCGA § 34-9-2.1, enacted in 1982 allows corporate officers to elect not to be covered by the system.”

Dennison v. G & M Quality Builders, Inc., 343 S.E.2d 786 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 12× “, failed to notify the State Board of Workers’ Compensation of an intention to opt out of coverage as a corporate officer (see OCGA § 34-9-2.1). His wife, as secretary/treasurer of the corporation, likewise did not notify the State Board of Workers’ Compensation.”

Chandler v. Hancock Builders, Inc., 422 S.E.2d 206 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “Hancock, and both had filed an exemption from workers’ compensation coverage under OCGA § 34-9-2.1. Additionally, while the Hancock’s son was an employee of Hancock Builders, Mr.”

Hitchcock v. Jack Wiggins, Inc., 549 S.E.2d 806 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 12× “Wiggins Auto, the employer, controverted Hitchcock’s claim on the ground that corporate officer Wiggins exempted himself from coverage under the Act, as authorized by OCGA § 34-9-2.1. 1 Wiggins Auto contended that if Wiggins is exempt from coverage, Hitchcock’s claim is not…”

G & M Quality Builders, Inc. v. Dennison, 351 S.E.2d 622 (Ga. 1987). · cites it 2× “After a hearing the trial court reversed the award. The trial court found: 1) that the findings of fact of the State Board of Workers’ Compensation were based on files and records of the State Board of Workers’ Compensation that were not introduced into evidence in the…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.