Rocor International v. Guyton

I concur in the judgment for the reason that when the ALJ substituted DonCo for Rocor in the interlocutory order on DonCo’s1 motion to reopen the OCGA § 34-9-102 hearing, upon finding that the claimant’s employer at the time of the heart attack was DonCo, the unanswered admissions became moot. The admission that Rocor was the employer had no legal effect because Rocor was no longer a party. No withdrawal pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-36 (b) was necessary.

Although the request had been served on Rocor and had not been answered or objected to within 30 days as required by OCGA § 9-11-36 (a) (2), the…