Legal Opinion
Caldwell v. Aarlin/Holcombe Armature Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided February 17, 1997No. S96A1419PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Hunstein, Justice.
We granted certiorari in this workers’ compensation case to address whether this Court’s decision in Ga. Electric Co. v. Rycroft, 259 Ga. 155 (378 SE2d 111) (1989), in which we adopted the false representation defense, is inconsistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 USCA § 12101 et seq. For the reasons set forth below, we decide that the Rycroft defense is not inconsistent with the ADA.
In Rycroft, supra, this Court adopted the three-factor test set forth in IB Larson, The Law of Workmen’s Compensation, § 47:53 that a false statement in an employment application…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Georgia Electric Co. v. RycroftSupreme Court of Georgia · 1989
- Huisenga v. Opus Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Lamay v. Roswell Independent School DistrictNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1994
- Altermatts Painting v. Subsequent Injury Trust FundSupreme Court of Georgia · 1996
3Cited by3 opinions
- Shepherd Center v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
- Caldwell v. Aarlin/Holcombe Armature Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1997
- SHARON MCKAY v. INALFA ROOF SYSTEMS, INC.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2025