Legal Opinion

Wentworth v. Fireman's Fund American Insurance

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 16, 1978No. 56441PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, Judge.

We reverse the trial court’s judgment, which was based on its finding that Wentworth failed to exercise "due diligence” in locating a known but missing tortfeasor. The request for service by publication pursuant to Code - § 56-407.1 (d) and (e) should have been granted. For this reason, summary judgment in favor of Fireman’s Fund, Wentworth’s uninsured motorist carrier, should not have been granted; moreover, Fireman’s Fund’s correct remedy was not a summary judgment, as its motion raised a matter in abatement.

I

Under Code § 56-407.1 (e), a motorist or vehicle owner against whom a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ogden Equipment Co. v. Talmadge Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1974
  2. Norman v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
  3. Highland Ditch Co. v. MumfordSupreme Court of Colorado · 1880

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Smith v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  2. Smith v. PhillipsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
  3. Wilson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  4. Cotton States Mutual Insurance v. BoganCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
  5. Bailey v. LawrenceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1998

14 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