lawskills
Loading
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY et al. v. SAMS.
43070.
Workmen's compensation. Clayton Superior Court. Before Judge Banke.
QUILLIAN, Judge.
The order of the State Board of Workmen's Compensation authorizing a change of physician not being appealable, the appeal is dismissed.
The State Board of Workmen's Compensation entered an award in which it found that the claimant was disabled and entitled to compensation benefits. Subsequent to the award becoming final, the claimant filed a request for a change of physicians. The employer opposed the change and sought a hearing on the question. The board declined to have a hearing and entered an order granting the claimant's request.
The employer contends that it was entitled to hearing before the board to determine whether the claimant was entitled to a change of physicians. With this contention we can not agree. Code Ann. 114-501 (as last amended by Ga. L. 1963, pp. 141, 153), provides in part: "The Board may at any time upon request of an employee order a change of physician or treatment and designate other treatment or another physician as suggested by the injured employee subject to the approval of the board, and in such a case the expense thereof shall be borne by the employer upon the same terms and conditions as hereinbefore provided in this section for medical and surgical treatment and attendance." There is no provision in the Act for a hearing on the question of whether the claimant shall be authorized to change physicians. The board's order in the case sub judice is not such an order as is contemplated by Code 114-710, which provides for appeals to the superior court.
This case is distinguishable from Travelers Ins. Co. v. Burch, 114 Ga. App. 723 (152 SE2d 697), and similar cases which involved the contestable question of whether the claimants were entitled to further medical benefits.
While the appeal was improvidently allowed there was no harmful error shown in the judgment affirming the board's order.
George & George, William V. George, for appellee.
Greene, Buckley, DeRieux, Moore & Jones, Thomas B. Branch, III, for appellants.
ARGUED SEPTEMBER 12, 1967 -- DECIDED SEPTEMBER 27, 1967 -- REHEARING DENIED OCTOBER 19, 1967 -- CERT. APPLIED FOR.
Friday May 22 19:44 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com