Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Jinks

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 4, 1992No. A91A1599, A91A1600Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPope, Judge

1. The majority has reversed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to plaintiff on her claim against State Farm for reimbursement of medical expenses in the amount of $2,983.95. Yet the majority’s opinion fails to address the issue raised by State Farm in this appeal as to whether a no-fault insurer is liable for medical expenses incurred by an insured at an HMO. (The majority states they are “inclined to think that an HMO membership for which the insured or her employer pays a premium is not different in principle from an ordinary medical insurance policy for which a premium is…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1984
  2. Baker v. J. C. Penney Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API