Legal Opinion · Dissent

Continental Assurance Co. v. Rothell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 11, 1970No. 44962Published

1DissentEberhardt, Judge

While I agree that the denial of the defendants motion was not error (Southern Bell Tel. &c. Co. v. Beaver, 120 Ga. App. 420 (3) (170 SE2d 737)), I cannot agree that it was proper to grant plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

This is a suit on an accident insurance policy which provides for the payment of benefits thereunder “ [i] f an insured, as a result of bodily injury caused solely by accident occurring while insured under the policy shall suffer, directly and independently of all other causes within ninety days from the date of the accident . . . ' for loss of life” the sum of $5,0007

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. United States Mutual Accident Ass'n v. BarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. Holland v. Sanfax CorporationCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  3. Travelers Insurance v. SheppardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
  4. Southland Butane Gas Co. v. BlackwellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
  5. Colonial Stores, Inc. v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968

37 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