Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

American Safety Indemnity Company v. Sto Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 30, 2017No. A17A0453Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBarnes, Presiding Judge

I respectfully dissent to Division 5 of the majority opinion that addresses Sto Corporation’s bad faith claim.14 Given the record before us, the question whether American Safety Indemnity Company (“ASIC”) acted in bad faith under OCGA § 33-4-6 by refusing to pay insurance policy proceeds to Sto should be resolved by a jury rather than by this Court. Consequently, the trial court’s denial of summary judgment to ASIC on Sto’s bad faith claim should be affirmed.

*275“It is usually a question for the jury whether an insurance company, in refusing to pay a loss, acted in bad faith” under OCGA § 33-4-6,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance v. McClainSupreme Court of Georgia · 1979
  2. Interstate Life & Accident Insurance v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1964
  3. Reserve Life Insurance Co. v. AyersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961
  4. Bayrock Mortgage Corp. v. Chicago Title InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2007
  5. Auto-Owners Insurance v. NeislerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2015

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API