Legal Opinion · Dissent

Adams v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 14, 2009No. A08A2315Published

1DissentJohnson, Presiding Judge

I agree with the trial court that State Farm was entitled to set off its $100,000 UM coverage by the full $25,000 paid from the tortfea-sor’s liability policy. I, therefore, respectfully dissent from the majority’s position. Adams’ election to voluntarily divert part of the $25,000 liability payment to satisfy his hospital bill did not reduce the available liability coverage below $25,000 or increase his UM coverage.

Here, contrary to Adams’ assertions, the legislative intent of the UM statute is not to make insureds whole, but “to place insureds in the same position they would be in relation…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Thurman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 2004
  2. Crafter v. State Farm InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  3. Young v. Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
  4. Toomer v. Allstate Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API