Swift Currie's Rusty Watts, on behalf of the appellants, argued the company shouldn't have to pay out workers' comp benefits because Gierum started making "tens of thousands of dollars" after his injury and wasn't doing handyman work in the 13 weeks prior. Credit: Ivan Kruk/Shutterstock
Georgia's courts continue to grapple with the aftereffects of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly when it comes to decisions regarding unemployment and workers' compensation.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
