Dickey v. Harden
| Decision Date | 31 January 1992 |
| Docket Number | Nos. A91A1656,A91A1657,s. A91A1656 |
| Citation | 202 Ga.App. 645,414 S.E.2d 924 |
| Parties | DICKEY et al. v. HARDEN. KIRKLAND et al. v. DICKEY, et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
H. Lehman Franklin, Statesboro, for Dickeys.
Doremus, Jones & Smith, Julian B. Smith, Jr., Metter, for Harden.
Beckmann & Pinson, Joseph H. Barrow, Savannah, for Kirklands.
Plaintiff Evelyn Dickey brought a negligence suit against defendant Mary Harden and defendants Sarah L. Kirkland and David C. Kirkland (the "Kirklands"), alleging that on October 21, 1987, while a passenger in Mary Harden's vehicle, plaintiff suffered serious injuries when the vehicle was struck by an automobile owned by David C. Kirkland and driven by Sarah Kirkland. In her answer Mary Harden denied liability and raised as a defense the exclusive remedy provisions of the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act. The Kirklands also denied liability in their answer and raised the affirmative defenses of release, accord and satisfaction, and payment of plaintiff's claim.
Roger Dickey, the husband of Evelyn Dickey, was joined as a party plaintiff pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-19 in order that his claim for loss of consortium be adjudicated in the same proceeding. After discovery was conducted, Mary Harden and the Kirklands filed motions for summary judgment. In its order dated February 26, 1991, the trial court granted Mary Harden's motion for summary judgment and denied the Kirklands' motion for summary judgment. These appeals follow our grant of the plaintiffs' and Kirklands' applications for interlocutory review of the trial court's order.
Plaintiff Evelyn Dickey and Mary Harden were co-workers at the Statesboro Head Start program and as a condition of employment, were required to attend training courses at nearby Georgia Southern University. These courses were offered during normal working hours, and the co-workers were to receive their regular pay while attending the courses. On October 21, 1987, en route to their first training session, the co-workers were involved in an automobile collision with the Kirklands' vehicle in which Evelyn Dickey, a passenger in Mary Harden's vehicle, sustained injuries. The record indicates that Evelyn Dickey received workers' compensation benefits for an approximate period of two to three months following the accident.
Relying on Floyd v. McFolley, 131 Ga.App. 4, 205 S.E.2d 29 (1974) and other cases in their brief, the plaintiffs contend that their claims against defendant Mary Harden are not barred by OCGA § 34-9-11. We disagree.
It is well settled under Georgia law that when an injury is sustained during the course of employment as a result of the negligence of a co-worker, the employee's sole remedy is against the employer pursuant to the provisions of the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act. OCGA § 34-9-11; Williams v. Thomas, 187 Ga.App. 527, 528, 370 S.E.2d 773 (1988).
Plaintiffs' reliance on Floyd is misplaced because Floyd was decided prior to April 1, 1974, the date OCGA § 34-9-11 (formerly Code Ann. § 114-103) was amended by Ga.L.1974, pp. 1143, 1144, to add that "no employee shall be deprived of any right to bring an action against any third-party tort-feasor, other than an employee of the same employer...." (Emphasis supplied.) By virtue of the 1974 amendment, the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act is now the exclusive remedy for injuries sustained by an employee during the course of employment resulting from the negligence of a co-worker. Williams v. Byrd, 242 Ga. 80, 81, 247 S.E.2d 874 (1978).
Plaintiffs also argue that the acts causing Evelyn Dickey's injury did not arise out of and in the course of her employment. However, the record clearly indicates that Evelyn Dickey was a passenger in the vehicle of her co-worker en route to a training course that both employees were required to attend as a condition of their continued employment with the Statesboro Head Start program. Plaintiff was being paid regular wages and the course was being given during hours she would have otherwise been working at the Head Start program. Accordingly, there is no doubt in this instance that plaintiff Evelyn Dickey's injury arose out and in the course of employment. See generally Thorn v. Phillips, 164 Ga.App. 47, 48, 296 S.E.2d 251 (1982).
Moreover, although the record is unclear as to whether plaintiff affirmatively applied for benefits or her employer voluntarily assumed liability, it is undisputed that plaintiff Evelyn Dickey received workers' compensation benefits for approximately two to three months following the incident and failed to contest the applicability of the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act until over two years later when her complaint in this action was filed. Under the circumstances presented here, we find plaintiff estopped from denying coverage by the act. Thorn v. Phillips, 164 Ga.App. 47, 48, 296 S.E.2d 251, supra; Cf. Associated Hosts of Ga. v. Marley, 184 Ga.App. 352(2), 361 S.E.2d 496 (1987).
Plaintiff Roger Dickey's cause of action for loss of consortium being derivative of that of his wife, he too is barred from bringing this negligence action against his wife's co-worker. Mann v. Workman, 181 Ga.App. 211(3), 351 S.E.2d 680 (1986), aff'd 257 Ga. 70, 354 S.E.2d 831 (1987). Accordingly, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to Mary Harden.
In December of 1987, approximately two months after the automobile accident, Evelyn Dickey retained attorney W.D. Simpkins III to represent her and pursue her claim against the Kirklands. Simpkins notified State Farm Insurance Company ("State Farm"), the Kirklands' insurer, as to his representation of Evelyn Dickey and entered into negotiations with State Farm on her behalf. The record is clear that at no time did Evelyn Dickey have any direct contact with the Kirklands or State Farm, nor did she notify either of them as to the existence of any limitation upon the authority of Simpkins to act on her behalf.
In November of 1988, Simpkins entered into an oral and written agreement with State Farm to settle the plaintiffs' claims against the Kirklands, and within one week, State Farm forwarded to Simpkins a general release (the "Release") for the Dickeys to execute along with a settlement check payable to the Dickeys in the amount of $5,000. It is undisputed that the Dickeys never authorized Simpkins to accept the settlement of $5,000, never received any of the proceeds therefrom, and were unaware that Simpkins had forged their signatures on the release and check endorsement. Approximately one year later, Evelyn Dickey hired another attorney to represent her interests and this action was brought against the Kirklands and Mary Harden.
Relying on Hynko v. Hilton, 198 Ga.App. 308, 401 S.E.2d 324 (1991), a case remarkably similar to the case sub judice and also involving attorney Simpkins, the Kirklands contend that the trial court erred in not granting their motion for summary judgment in that plaintiff Evelyn Dickey was bound by the settlement agreement...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clark v. Perino
...when the settlement was entered. See generally Green v. Lanford, 222 Ga.App. 480, 481, 474 S.E.2d 681 (1996); Dickey v. Harden, 202 Ga.App. 645, 414 S.E.2d 924 (1992); Hynko v. Hilton, 198 Ga.App. 308, 310, 401 S.E.2d 324 (1991). Compare Pembroke State Bank v. Warnell, 266 Ga. 819, 823(4), ......
-
Smith v. Ellis
...1. It is undisputed that Janet Smith's claim is dependent on the viability of her husband's claim. See Dickey v. Harden, 202 Ga.App. 645, 646, 414 S.E.2d 924 (1992). 2.OCGA § 34–9–15 provides in full that: (a) Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed so as to prevent settlements......
-
McLeod v. Blase
...regard to fault or common-law defenses and without the delay inherent in tort litigation."). 5. See also Dickey v. Harden, 202 Ga.App. 645, 645-646, 414 S.E.2d 924 (1992) (accord); Georgia Workers' Compensation Law & Practice, § 6. See also Clark v. Williamson, 206 Ga.App. 329, 331(1), 425 ......
-
Stevenson v. Ray
...is similarly barred from bringing a loss of consortium claim against the co-worker of his or her spouse. See Dickey v. Harden, 202 Ga.App. 645, 646, 414 S.E.2d 924 (1992). 4. Connell v. Head, 253 Ga.App. 443, 444, 559 S.E.2d 73 (2002). 5. It is undisputed that Stevenson was engaged in his e......