Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Const. Co., Inc., A97A2529
| Decision Date | 15 December 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. A97A2529,A97A2529 |
| Citation | 495 S.E.2d 136,229 Ga.App. 838 |
| Parties | , 98 FCDR 175 FLINT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION v. ED SMITH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Chambless, Higdon & Carson, Emmitte H. Griggs, Jon C. Wolfe, Joseph H. Davis, Macon, Daniel, Lawson, Tuggle & Jerles, Tom W. Daniel, Perry, for appellant.
Weissman, Nowack, Curry & Zaleon, Frances R. Mathis, Leigh M. Wilco, Atlanta, for appellee.
Appellant Flint Electric Membership Corporation appeals from an order granting summary judgment in behalf of appellee/third party defendant Ed Smith Construction Company, Inc.
Suit was filed for damages for personal injury and loss of consortium by Edward and Patricia Lee against appellant Flint Electric who, contemporaneously with the filing of their answer, filed a third-party complaint against Ed Smith Construction Company relying upon the indemnity provisions of the "High-voltage Safety Act." See generally OCGA § 46-3-30 et seq. At the time of injury, Mr. Lee was an employee of appellee construction company. While the construction company was reconstructing a bridge and culvert, a crane being operated by one of its employees came in contact with a high voltage line of appellant electric company. Mr. Lee who was on the job at the time sustained an electrical shock when electricity from appellant's lines passed through the crane's cable into a bundle of steel bars that he was touching. Thereafter, Mr. Lee filed a workers' compensation claim against the construction company and was awarded some weekly and medical benefits until the self-insured workers' compensation program went into receivership.
Appellant's sole enumeration is that the trial court erred in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment. Appellant contends that it was entitled to indemnity under the provisions of the High-voltage Safety Act and that such indemnity is not and should not be barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act. Held:
OCGA § 46-3-40(b) of the High-voltage Safety Act pertinently provides: Except as exempted under §§ 46-3-37 and 46-3-48, which sections are not here applicable, the term, " '[p]erson responsible for the work' means the person actually doing the work as well as any person, firm or corporation who employs and carries on his payroll any person actually doing the work." OCGA § 46-3-32(3). Although the above indemnity provisions are statutory, appellee construction company contends it cannot be subjected to suit, as a third party, in view of the exclusive remedy bar of the Workers' Compensation Act (OCGA § 34-9-11). OCGA § 34-9-11(a) pertinently provides: "The rights and the remedies granted to an employee by this chapter shall...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Steiner v. Handler
... ... and directors of Corporate Art International, Inc. (Corporate Art) and their wives, all of whom ... 835] of their co-defendants. Appellant enumerates three errors ... Ga.-Pacific Corp., 177 Ga.App. 852, 341 S.E.2d 499, found that ... ...
-
Flint Elec. Membership v. Ed Smith Const.
...of the WCA barred Flint's claim for indemnification under the HVSA. The Court of Appeals affirmed, Flint EMC v. Ed Smith Constr. Co., 229 Ga.App. 838, 495 S.E.2d 136 (1997), and we granted Flint's petition for certiorari to consider whether the exclusive remedy provision of the WCA preclude......
-
Georgia Power Co. v. Franco Remodeling Co.
...Co.,1 270 Ga. 464, 466, 511 S.E.2d 160 (1999), our Supreme Court reversed this court's decision in Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Constr. Co., 229 Ga.App. 838, 495 S.E.2d 136 (1997), and determined that the indemnity provision of the High-voltage Safety Act could be enforced witho......
-
Georgia Power Co. v. FRANCO REMODELING, A98A0156.
...controlled by City of Dalton v. Gene Rogers Constr. Co., 223 Ga.App. 819, 479 S.E.2d 171. See also Flint Elec. Membership Corp. v. Ed Smith Constr. Co., 229 Ga.App. 838, 495 S.E.2d 136 (1997); Preston v. Ga. Power Co., 227 Ga.App. 449, 452(1), 489 S.E.2d 573 (1997); compare Allen v. King Pl......
-
Workers' Compensation - H. Michael Bagley, Daniel C. Kniffen, Katherine D. Dixon, and Marion H. Martin
...244. 227 Ga. App. 841, 490 S.E.2d 432 (1997). 245. Id. at 841, 490 S.E.2d at 432. 246. Id. at 845-46, 490 S.E.2d at 435. 247. Id. 248. 229 Ga. App. 838, 495 S.E.2d 136 (1997). 249. Id. at 838, 495 S.E.2d at 137. 250. See O.C.G.A. Sec. 46-3-30 to -40 (1998). 251. Id. Sec. 46-3-40(b). 252. 22......
-
Workers' Compensation - H. Michael Bagley, Daniel C. Kniffen, Katherine D. Dixon, and Marion Handley Martin
...557. 43. Id. (Fletcher, J., dissenting). 44. Id., 526 S.E.2d at 557-58. 45. Id. 46. Id. 47. 233 Ga. App. 640, 505 s.e.2d 488 (1998). 48. 229 Ga. App. 838, 495 s.e.2d 136 (1997). 49. 223 Ga. App. 819, 479 s.e.2d 171 (1996). 50. 233 Ga. App. at 643, 505 s.e.2d at 490. 51. 240 Ga. App. 771, 52......