Abercrombie v. Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1DissentAndrews, Judge
I respectfully dissent. As the majority notes, the policy clearly provided that the injuries must arise from the ownership, maintenance or use of the vehicle. In this matter, the incident for which recovery is sought did not arise out of the operation, maintenance or use of the VanAlstine’s automobile and the superior court’s grant of summary judgment should be affirmed.
In Southeastern Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Stevens, 142 Ga. App. 562 (236 SE2d 550) (1977), the general rule set forth was that “where a connection appears between the ‘use’ of the vehicle and the discharge of the firearm and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Southeastern Fidelity Insurance v. StevensCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Washington v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Insurance Co. of North America v. DorrisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Rustin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1985
- Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. BurnettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.