O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 34-9-311 (2019)

Investigation of medical questions by medical board; hearing before medical board; examination of employee by physician; autopsy to determine cause of death; filing of report of medical board with State Board of Workers’ Compensation

✓ 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

Reserved. Repealed by Ga. L. 1987, p. 1474, § 9, effective July 1, 1987.

Annotations

Editor’s notes. - This Code section was based on Code 1933, §§ 114-818, 114-819, 114-820, 114-821, enacted by Ga. L. 1946, p. 103. Ga. L. 1987, p. 1474, § 17,

not codified by the General Assembly, provided that that Act would apply to any occupational disease not previously diagnosed before July 1, 1987.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1984–1989 · leading case: Synalloy Corp. v. Newton, 326 S.E.2d 470 (Ga. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Synalloy Corp. v. Newton, 326 S.E.2d 470 (Ga. 1985). · cites it 4× “NOTES [1] (F) Other occupational diseases, provided the employee or the employee's dependents first prove to the satisfaction of the State Board of Workers' Compensation (or the medical board, if the matter in controversy is referred to it under Code Section 34-9-311) all of the…”
Price v. Lithonia Lighting Co., 343 S.E.2d 688 (Ga. 1986). · cites it 4× “The full board referred the matter to the Medical Board of the State Board of Workers' Compensation under OCGA § 34-9-311. The medical board found that the appellant suffers from pre-existing bronchiectasis; that her condition has been aggravated as a result of her employment…”
Canton Textile Mills, Inc. v. Lathem, 317 S.E.2d 189 (Ga. 1984). · cites it 2× “In their second enumeration of error appellants contend the Administrative Law Judge should have submitted this case to the *106 Medical Board in accordance with OCGA § 34-9-311, because the evidence submitted at the hearing established a “medical controversy.”
Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Hambrick, 336 S.E.2d 617 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Enumeration of Error 6 states that, pursuant to OCGA § 34-9-311 (a), the Medical Board was required to review appellee’s medical records before a decision on compensability could be rendered.”
Whitaker v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 330 S.E.2d 761 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “The medical evidence, however, indicated that the appellant’s disabling respiratory impairment resulted from both byssinosis and other, non-work related *534 causes, in particular a history of smoking cigarettes for several years.”
Nabisco Brands, Inc. v. Huggins, 379 S.E.2d 630 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “After the initial hearing, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that the medical questions relating to the claimant’s claim were in controversy and issued an interlocutory order referring the claim to the medical board as provided by OCGA § 34-9-311. 1 The medical board…”
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.