Wiley v. Bituminous Casualty Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) An examination of the evidence with reference to the first headnote herein discloses that, while Dr. F. Cortez Mims treated patients and made examinations of persons that were referred to him from time to time by the insurance carrier in this case, yet that he was not on a regular retainer to perform this service. There is nothing in the record that indicates that he was on the payroll of the insurance carrier to stand in readiness to perform this type of service whether’ the same was actually performed or not. On the other hand, it affirmatively appears…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rourke v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- Tillman v. MoodySupreme Court of Georgia · 1935
- Columbia Casualty Co. v. WhitenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
- Travelers Insurance Co. v. ColvardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1943
3Cited by12 opinions
- Georgia Marine Salvage Co. v. MerrittCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1950
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. KingCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Hanover Insurance v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
- Williamson v. Gulf InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
- Continental Casualty Co. v. CastleberryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.