Legal Opinion

General Insurance Co. of America v. Camden Construction Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 10, 1967No. 42548PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Quillian, Judge.

We recognize the rule that: “Where a provision in an insurance policy is susceptible of two or more constructions, the court will adopt that construction which is most favorable to the insured.” John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Frazer, 194 Ga. 201 (20 SE2d 915); North British &c. Ins. Co. v. Mercer, 211 Ga. 161 (84 SE2d 570). “While it is the general rule that ambiguities in an insurance contract must be construed most favorably to the insured, this rule has no application when the contract is unambiguous.” Hulsey v. Interstate Life &c. Ins. Co., 207 Ga. 167 (1) (60 SE2d…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Scales v. PeevyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
  2. Hulsey v. Interstate Life & Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1950
  3. Moore v. Atlanta Transit System, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
  4. Queen Insurance Co. of America v. Nalley Discount Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1960
  5. Dillard v. BrannanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Achor Center, Inc. v. HolmesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1995
  2. Royal Indemnity Co. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
  3. National Surety Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1971
  4. Howard Associates, Inc. v. Home Indemnity CompanyColorado Court of Appeals · 1974
  5. Pooler v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1985

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