NWCDN Members regularly post articles and summary judgements in workers’ compensations law in your state.
Select a state from the dropdown menu below to scroll through the state specific archives for updates and opinions on various workers’ compensation laws in your state.
Contact information for NWCDN members is also located on the state specific links in the event you have additional questions or your company is seeking a workers’ compensation lawyer in your state.
Rayford H. Taylor
Of Counsel
Casey Gilson P.C.
Six Concourse Parkway, Suite 2200
Atlanta, Georgia 30328
770-512-0300 -Ext. 529
770-512-0070 -Fax
rtaylor@caseygilson.com
www.caseygilson.com
Garcia v. Shaw Indus., Inc., (03/29/2013)
Employer found not liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation for reporting employee's possible fraud to State Board of Workers' Compensation
The employee was not a citizen of the United States, but entered the country legally with a border-crossing card. The employee was not authorized to work in the United States, but obtained employment using the name, Social Security number, and personal information of another person, whose identity the employee paid to use.
The employee fell and injured her back at work. After treatment, she returned to light duty work and filed a claim for benefits. During that period, the employer became aware of the employee's situation and immigration status. The employer terminated the employee, but continued to provide medical treatment and TPD benefits.
The employer filed a complaint with the State Board's fraud and compliance unit. The employee was later arrested on warrants for forgery and possession of fraudulent documents after her deposition in the workers' compensation case was completed. The employer cooperated with the State Board, and arranged for the State Board to arrest her after the deposition. The employee filed her IIED suit, which was dismissed.
On appeal, the employee contended the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the employer on her IIED claim, because there was evidence the employer set her up for arrest causing her severe emotional distress. The appellate court concluded the employer's conduct did not rise to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct necessary for an IIED claim. Even if the employer knew the employee was operating under an alias, it was not malice for the employer to want to bring the illegal behavior to an end. In addition, when the employer filed an administrative fraud complaint with the Georgia State Board of Workers' Compensation, it truthfully and accurately related the facts.
720424-1