Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Hood
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Hall, Judge.
The defendants argue in support of their general demurrers that their policies do not cover liability for the conduct upon which the judgment against their insured was based, because it is contraiy to public policy to indemnify a person against his wilful and wanton misconduct. The plaintiff’s judgment resulted from a negligence action in which the insured and others were charged with engaging in an automobile race on the highway. “Racing on a public highway contrary to the laws of the State” has been described by this court as wilful and wanton misconduct. Roberts v. King, 102…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- East Atlanta Land Co. v. MowerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Sheehan v. GorianskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Roberts v. KingCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
- Willingham, Wright & Covington v. GloverCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1922
- King v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1933
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- White v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1969
- Greenwood Cemetery, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1977
- Anthony v. FrithMississippi Supreme Court · 1981
- Stein v. Massachusetts Bay InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
- LaSalle National Insurance v. PophamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.