United States: Burdette In The Georgia Supreme Court

Last Updated: September 28 2017
Article by Thomas M. Whitley

The affirmative defense of willful misconduct has seen several dramatic changes in the last few years, with decisions from the Georgia Court of Appeals and now the Georgia Supreme Court.

In 2015, the Georgia Court of Appeals issued a decision in Burdette v. Chandler Telecom, LLC., 335 Ga.App. 190, 779 S.E.2d 75 (2015), that made the assertion of the willful misconduct defense all but impossible in cases that did not involve criminal or quasi-criminal behavior.  However, a recent reversal of the Appeals Court by the Supreme Court, Chandler Telecom, LLC v. Burdette (Ga., 2017), has breathed some life into the defense. This article will examine the relevant statutory authority and historical interpretation of the willful misconduct defense, before and after the recent Burdette reversal. It will also provide recommendations on how to apply this defense moving forward.

Statutory Authority

Any examination of case law must be grounded in statute whenever applicable. O.C.G.A. § 34-9-17 states that "no compensation shall be allowed for an injury or death due to the employee's willful misconduct, including intentionally self-inflicted injury, or growing out of his or her attempt to injure another, or for the willful failure or refusal to use a safety appliance or perform a duty required by statute." Willful misconduct is an affirmative defense; it must be shown that the willful misconduct of the employee is the proximate cause of the injury by a preponderance of the evidence. Commc'ns, Inc. v. Cannon, 174 Ga. App. 820, 820 (331 S.E.2d 112) (1985).

History of Burdette

In the case of Burdette v. Chandler Telecom, the claimant Burdette was injured when he fell while descending from the top of a cell tower.  Evidence presented at the hearing demonstrated that Burdette had been specifically directed by his supervisor to descend from the tower in a certain manner, and he was not allowed to use a method called "controlled descent," which is similar to rappelling. Towards the end of the workday when his accident occurred, Burdette announced that he wanted to descend using the prohibited "controlled descent" method.  Another worker, who was the on-site lead, testified that immediately before his descent, he told Burdette to climb down because they did not have a safety rope and that Burdette might lose his job for failure to follow policy.  The on-site lead then repeated this warning several more times.  Despite the admonition, Burdette began a controlled descent and ultimately fell, suffering a serious injury to his ankle, leg, and hip. Testimony was put forward to show that the fall was the fault of Burdette rather than an equipment malfunction.

The ALJ found that that Burdette was barred from compensation because he had engaged in "willful misconduct." The State Board affirmed the ALJ's decision and that decision was appealed by Burdette to superior court, which affirmed the Board's findings. Burdette appealed to the Court of Appeals, which reversed the lower courts findings.

The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision and held that the ALJ and Board had erred in finding Burdette's workers' compensation claim was barred due to willful misconduct on the part of Burdette.

The Court of Appeals looked at past cases to support its rationale, primarily relying on Supreme Court decisions and the Court of Appeals ruling in Wilbro v. Mossman, 207 Ga. App. 387 (427 SE2d 857) (1993). The Court of Appeals found that there was no meaningful distinction between Burdette's claim and its decision in Wilbro.

In Wilbro, the claimant was a store clerk who fell from a shelf and injured her head and back. The evidence presented at the hearing demonstrated that the clerk had been instructed not to restock while standing on shelves, and that she was reminded by a co-worker not to stand on the shelves. The Court of Appeals in Burdette found that the claimant had not engaged in willful misconduct, noting that "the conduct was at most a violation of instructions and/or the doing of a hazardous act in which the danger was obvious, but was not conduct that was criminal or quasi-criminal in nature."

This interpretation left a very narrow avenue with which to pursue a willful misconduct defense.  Essentially this decision stripped down the defense to only apply in instances where a claimant acted in a quasi-criminal manner. The Court of Appeals in its Burdette decision noted that it felt bound by stare decisis to rule in a manner consistent with Wilbro.

Chandler v. Burdette in the Supreme Court

On February 27, 2017, the Georgia Supreme Court issued a ruling reversing the Court of Appeals. It framed the central question of the case as "whether an employee may – in deliberate disobedience of his employer's explicit prohibition – act in a knowingly dangerous fashion with disregard for the probable consequences of that act, and still recover workers' compensation when injured by this disobedient act." The Court concludes that recovery may be barred in such circumstances.  In so ruling, the Supreme Court highlighted a misapplication of O.C.G.A. § 34-9-17 (a), which it believed that the Court of Appeals had mistakenly applied in its cases subsequent to the Wilbro decision.

The Supreme Court focused on the application of one of the seminal cases, Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Carroll, 169 Ga. 333, 342 (1) (150 SE 208) (1929),  as the basis for its reversal. As mentioned above, the Court of Appeals focused on the language from Wilbro decision, which noted that the conduct in question was not criminal or quasi criminal in nature, and thus could not qualify as willful misconduct. This was in error. The Supreme Court noted that the Carroll decision "explicitly stated that 'criminal or quasi-criminal' meant simply 'the intentional doing of something either with the knowledge that it is likely to result in serious injury or with the wanton and reckless disregard of its probable consequences." Chandler Telecom, LLC v. Burdette (Ga., 2017) Thus, while the "mere violation of instructions or the mere doing of a hazardous act in which the danger is obvious cannot constitute willful misconduct," it "does not mean that the intentional violation of rules cannot ever constitute willful misconduct." Instead, in such cases, the "finder of fact must determine whether such an intentional act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to result in serious injury, or with the wanton and reckless disregard of its probable consequences." Id.

The Supreme Court thus clarified the correct standard. It stated that "an intentional violation bars compensation only when done either with the knowledge that it is likely to result in serious injury, or with a wanton and reckless disregard of its probable injurious consequences." Id. The Supreme Court accordingly reversed and remanded Burdette to the Board to consider the facts in light of the correct standard.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The Burdette ruling revives the willful misconduct defense to allow considerations of actions outside the strict confines of criminal or quasi criminal conduct. While the standard put forward by the Supreme Court will still not be easy to meet, it does open the door for a more viable willful misconduct defense in more circumstances, namely where a claimant acts with extreme disregard to his own health and safety. This means that in situations like Burdette, when a claimant acts in contravention to an employer's rules with disregard to his own personal safety, an employer should consider advancing a willful misconduct defense. Importantly, it now allows for common sense to be taken into account when evaluating whether a willful misconduct defense can be raised.

Moving forward, especially in a situation where an employee engages in high-risk work, clearly delineated guidelines for the activity of employees should be helpful. These guidelines would serve a dual purpose, to both instruct employees in best safety practices for potentially dangerous work and to highlight the danger of an employee's failure to act in this manner. Implementing clear guidelines should help limit accidents, which is desirable for employees and employers. However, if an accident occurs when an employee has acted in contradiction to clearly expressed safety guidelines, the willful misconduct defense could be available.

The likelihood of success for this defense will also depend on the clarity and reasoning behind such employer rules and guidelines.  The standard articulated by the Georgia Supreme Court notes that intentional violation of rules can be willful misconduct if an employer can show that the conduct in question was done with knowledge of the risk of serious injury or with reckless disregard to that risk. While it is difficult to predict how the standard will be applied by ALJs in practice, the ability to show knowledge of a workplace rule and its purpose prior to violation, perhaps through orientation with safety guidelines required to be read and signed by an employee, will likely be important in successfully asserting the willful misconduct defense. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions