O.C.G.A. § 34-9-224 (2019)
Payment of compensation to employees in service of more than one employer
Whenever any employee whose injury or death is compensable under this chapter shall at the time of the injury be in the joint service of two or more employers subject to this chapter, such employers shall contribute to the payment of such compensation in proportion to their wage liability to such employee; provided, however, that nothing in this Code section shall prevent any reasonable arrangement between such employers for a different distribution as between themselves of the ultimate burden of compensation.
History
(Ga. L. 1920, p. 167, § 49; Code 1933, § 114-419.)
Annotations
Law reviews. - For article surveying developments in Georgia workers’ compensation law from mid-1980 through
mid-1981, see 33 Mercer L. Rev. 323 (1981).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Legislative intent. - This section demonstrated an intention on the part of the legislature to apportion the loss when an employee was in the joint service of two or more employers. United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Murray, 140 Ga. App. 708, 231 S.E.2d 502 (1976). Jurisdiction of board. - If more than one compensation-insurance carrier was liable for compensation in the case of a single injury to an employee, the State Board had jurisdiction to prorate such compensation in the award when originally made. Glens Falls Indem. Co. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 202 Ga. 752, 44 S.E.2d 543 (1947).
Necessity of wage liability. - This section was not directly applicable when there was no wage liability on the part of the ‘‘employers.’’ United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Murray, 140 Ga. App. 708, 231 S.E.2d 502 (1976). Employee may be servant of multiple employers. - It is well settled that the fact that an employee is the general servant of one employer does not prevent the employee from becoming the particular servant of another under special circumstances. Scott v. Savannah Elec. & Power Co., 84 Ga. App. 553, 66 S.E.2d 179 (1951). Employee may collect from one of
two joint venture partners. - O.C.G.A. § 34-9-224 does not prevent an injured employee from collecting workers’ compensation benefits from one partner in a joint venture when the other partner, from whom the employee received all the employee’s wages, is unable to pay any workers’ compensation benefits. Seckinger & Co. v. Foreman, 252 Ga. 540, 314 S.E.2d 891 (1984). No liability found. - When the record affords no basis for a holding that a county incurred any liability for payment of wages, there can be no liability on the county and its insurer for payment of workers’ compensation to claimants as the statute expressly imposes proration of liability in proportion to wage liability. Ar-
gonaut Ins. Co. v. Head, 149 Ga. App. 528, 254 S.E.2d 747 (1979). Award prorated. - When a police officer was killed in disbanding a disturbance while performing an authorized, independent security job, the officer was also performing a police function, on duty in an emergency, and the city was required to bear its share of the compensation award under this section. United States Fire Ins. Co. v. City of Atlanta, 135 Ga. App. 390, 217 S.E.2d 647 (1975). Cited in Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Daniel, 80 Ga. App. 383, 55 S.E.2d 854 (1949); Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Moore, 142 Ga. App. 191, 235 S.E.2d 591 (1977); Bennett v. Browning, 196 Ga. App. 158, 395 S.E.2d 333 (1990).
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Workmen’s compensation: one employed concurrently or jointly by several, 58 ALR 1395. Right as between employer primarily responsible under Workmen’s Compensation Act and employer secondarily liable under the act (or their insurers) where injury was due to latter’s negligence, 117 ALR 571.
Right to indemnity or contribution as between insurance carriers under workmen’s compensation laws of different states, 126 ALR 881. Modern status of effect of State Workmen’s Compensation Act on right of third-person tort-feasor to contribution or indemnity from employer of injured or killed workman, 100 ALR3d 350.