Legal Opinion · Dissent

Atlanta Casualty Co. v. Flewellen

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 1, 1982No. 64501; 64511Published

1DissentBanke, Judge

1. If the General Assembly intended anything in enacting former Code Ann. § 56-3404b (b), it was to insure that an applicant was made aware of his or her option to purchase more than the minimum PIP coverage, in a manner which would conclusively document his or her election in this regard in case any question later arose concerning it. Perhaps the method devised by the General Assembly was not as elegant as some would like, but this does not make the requirements set forth in the statute unclear. The statute specifically requires that the application “contain separate spaces for the insured…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Winters v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  2. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. MoserSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  3. Walker v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
  4. Williams v. RayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
  5. A & a Heating & Air Conditioning Co. v. BurgessCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API