Industrial Machinery Injuries in Georgia: Product Liability and Third-Party Claims

Published Read 6 min read

On this page

A worker caught in an industrial machine has a workers’ compensation claim against the employer, and the statute makes that remedy exclusive of other claims against it. The claims that remain run against others: the company that built the machine or its parts, the company that changed it after the sale, and the dealer that sold or serviced it. Which of them can be sued depends on the design, on what happened to the machine after it left the factory, and on the date of the first sale.

Why the Claim Runs Against Someone Other Than the Employer

The workers’ compensation remedies displace the employee’s other rights and remedies, and all other civil liabilities at common law or otherwise, on account of the injury, loss of service, or death, but an employee may still bring an action against a third-party tort-feasor other than an employee of the same employer, a person who provides workers’ compensation benefits under a contract with the employer, and a construction design professional under the conditions the statute states (OCGA 34-9-11(a)).

The Guarding Rule at the Workplace

Federal workplace rules require guarding on machines. “One or more methods of machine guarding shall be provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks,” and guards “shall be affixed to the machine where possible and secured elsewhere if for any reason attachment to the machine is not possible” (29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1), (2)). The point of operation, “the area on a machine where work is actually performed upon the material being processed,” must be guarded where the machine’s operation exposes an employee to injury, and the guard must be designed “as to prevent the operator from having any part of his body in the danger zone during the operating cycle” when no more specific standard applies (29 CFR 1910.212(a)(3)(i), (ii)).

The decisions below involve a component replaced by the employer after the sale and a guard-door that the dealer offered only as an option.

The Manufacturer and the Design Test

The company that made a machine sold new answers in tort to an operator or anyone else reasonably affected by it, if the machine left the factory not merchantable and reasonably suited to its intended use and that condition proximately caused the injury (OCGA 51-1-11(b)(1)). For a design claim, Georgia applies a test that compares the risks built into a design with the usefulness of the product in that form (Banks v. ICI Americas, Inc., 264 Ga. 732 (1994)).

Which Sale Starts the Ten Years

The statute bars an action for an injury brought more than ten years after the first sale for use or consumption of the machine that caused it (OCGA 51-1-11(b)(2)). In Campbell v. Altec Industries, Inc., 288 Ga. 535 (2011), a utility company’s employee was injured when the lower boom lift cylinder of a bucket truck failed. One company built the truck and sold it to the employer; another built the cylinder. On a question certified by the Eleventh Circuit, the Supreme Court of Georgia held that the period “begins to run when a finished product is sold as new to the intended consumer who is to receive the product,” and that “suit must have been filed against any manufacturer under OCGA § 51-1-11 (b) within ten years of the date of the sale of the finished product” to the employer.

For example, imagine a component tested on January 3, 2015, a finished machine assembled on May 1, 2015, and the machine sold as new to the plant that will operate it on August 10, 2016. Under Campbell, the ten years run from August 10, 2016, for every manufacturer involved, including the maker of the component.

A Machine Changed After the Sale

When a third party replaces part of a product’s design after the sale, injuries caused by the replacement cannot be traced to the original design, although a slight modification may leave a jury question. In Talley v. City Tank Corp., 158 Ga. App. 130 (1981), a city sanitation worker was killed when a trash container uncoupled from a garbage truck and swung on its hoisting cable. The city’s own maintenance personnel had removed the truck’s original pivot plates, replaced them with a different bracket system, and shortened the container trunions to fit. The Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the truck’s manufacturer and the company that assembled and sold it: “if the design of that product has been independently altered, eliminated and replaced by a third party after the sale and injuries then result, those injuries cannot be traced to or be the proximate result of the manufacturer’s original design which did not exist at the time of injury.” The court noted that a slight modification may present a jury question. The decision applied the predecessor of OCGA 51-1-11.

The Dealer That Sold the Machine

A dealer that sells another company’s product is not strictly liable for it, but it can still face negligence claims about what it told the buyer. In Boyce v. Gregory Poole Equipment Co., 269 Ga. App. 891 (2004), a dealer sold a standup forklift without an optional rear guard-door, and an employee of the buyer bled to death after a parked forklift’s forks entered the operator’s compartment. The Court of Appeals held that the dealer, “as a product seller of a product manufactured by another,” was “not liable in strict product liability by statute.” It reversed summary judgment on the negligence theories, finding jury questions about the dealer’s failure to advise the buyer about the guard-door and the adequacy of a later warning.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a company that repaired or maintained the machine treated as its manufacturer?
Not for strict liability. The statute’s product seller definition covers a business that repairs or maintains a product or otherwise helps place it in the stream of commerce, and in a strict liability action a product seller carries no manufacturer liability under OCGA 51-1-11 (OCGA 51-1-11.1(a), (b)). A manufacturer that also does some of those things remains a manufacturer (OCGA 51-1-11.1(a)).

Does the ten-year limit end a manufacturer’s duty to warn?
No. Subsection (c) applies the limit to negligence claims, but it preserves the duty to warn of a danger from a product’s use once the manufacturer knows of it, and it excepts conduct showing a willful, reckless, or wanton disregard for life or property (OCGA 51-1-11(c)).

What filing period applies to the injury claim itself?
The period for injuries to the person is two years after the right of action accrues (OCGA 9-3-33), separate from the ten-year limit that runs from the first sale.

  • OCGA 34-9-11(a)
  • 29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1), (2), (3)
  • OCGA 51-1-11(b)(1), (2), (c); OCGA 51-1-11.1(a), (b)
  • Banks v. ICI Americas, Inc., 264 Ga. 732 (1994)
  • Campbell v. Altec Industries, Inc., 288 Ga. 535 (2011)
  • Talley v. City Tank Corp., 158 Ga. App. 130 (1981)
  • Boyce v. Gregory Poole Equipment Co., 269 Ga. App. 891 (2004)
  • OCGA 9-3-33

Disclaimer

This article provides general information about machinery injury claims under Georgia law. It is not legal or medical advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Which parties can be sued and when depends on the machine, the sales, and the specific facts. A worker injured by a machine should seek medical care and consult a licensed Georgia attorney promptly about the particular situation.

Related posts:

  1. Elevator and Escalator Accidents in Georgia When someone is hurt on an elevator or escalator in Georgia, the statute places the duty to keep the equipment in a safe operating condition on its owner or lessee,......
  2. Spinal Cord Injury Claims in Georgia: Seeking Justice for Paralysis and Permanent Disability A person left paralyzed or permanently impaired by a spinal cord injury may face decades of future care, and a Georgia claim has to turn that care into a figure......
  3. Gym and Fitness Center Injuries in Georgia Georgia's courts have held that a business can release itself from its own negligence but not from gross negligence or wilful misconduct, and the exact words of a release can......
  4. Texting While Driving: Proving Distracted Driver Negligence The distraction that causes a texting crash happens inside the other car, where no one outside it can see. A driver who does not brake, swerve, or react leaves a......
  5. Rideshare Driver Injury Claims: When Uber and Lyft Drivers Get Hurt Which insurance pays for a rideshare driver's crash in Georgia depends on what the driver's app was doing at the moment of impact. Georgia's statute on rideshare insurance, which calls......
  6. Mitigation of Damages in Georgia Personal Injury Cases Georgia law looks at an injured person's own conduct after the defendant's negligence through a duty to mitigate and a rule on avoidable consequences. The first requires ordinary care and......
  7. Emergency Room Negligence in Georgia: When Rushed Care Causes Harm A patient hurt by care in a Georgia hospital emergency department faces a heavier burden than the ordinary medical malpractice plaintiff. Under OCGA 51-1-29.5, a physician or health care provider......
  8. Airport Shuttle Accidents: Hotel and Transit Van Claims The claim of a passenger hurt in an airport shuttle or a hotel van depends on the duty Georgia law places on a carrier of passengers and on who operated......
  9. Economic vs. Non-Economic Damages in Georgia Personal Injury Cases Georgia sorts the money in an injury claim with two pairs of labels that come from different statutes. General and special damages are distinguished in OCGA 51-12-2; economic and noneconomic......
  10. Bank and ATM Assault Claims in Georgia An assault or robbery at a bank branch or an automated teller machine is, for a cause of action arising on or after April 21, 2025, a negligent security claim......
  11. Exercise Equipment Injuries in Georgia: Treadmill and Weight Machine Defects Exercise equipment raises questions that other products may not: the machine may not be in use when someone is hurt, its risks may be visible to anyone who looks, and......
  12. Highway Work Zone Accidents in Georgia A crash in a Georgia highway work zone can involve the driver who caused it, the contractor doing the work, and the government that owns the road, and each answers......
  13. Franchisor Liability for Franchisee Negligence in Georgia A franchised business carries a national name, but the company behind the counter can be a separate local operator that licenses the brand. Whether a person hurt there can reach......
  14. Hospital Visitor Injury Claims in Georgia A visitor hurt in a hospital corridor, lobby, or parking area is not the patient, and Georgia law treats the visitor's claim as a premises claim rather than a claim......
  15. Surgical Errors in Georgia: Wrong Site Surgery and Retained Objects A claim for a surgical error is a medical malpractice claim under Georgia statutes, and those statutes attach conditions that an ordinary injury claim does not have: an expert's affidavit......
  16. Bridge and Overpass Failure Claims in Georgia When a Georgia bridge or overpass fails, the injured person may have claims against the public body that owns it and against the firms that designed or built it, and......

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *