Eells v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
324 Ga. App. 901
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Eells appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint and grant of summary judgment for State Farm.
- An uninsured motorist hit-and-run on February 28, 2009 left Eells severely injured; he was treated at home by his parents.
- Mother orally informed a State Farm agent about the accident a few months later; no written claim was filed.
- Policy required timely written notice within 30 days and stated no coverage until terms are met.
- Eells filed suit against the uninsured motorist and State Farm on February 17, 2011; State Farm moved for summary judgment claiming lack of timely written notice.
- On appeal, the court affirms the oral-notice inadequacy but remands on ambiguity and justification issues regarding the delay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the policy’s notice terms are conditions precedent to coverage | Eells contends written notice is not a condition precedent | State Farm argues notice is a condition precedent | Yes; notice is a condition precedent to coverage |
| Whether oral notice satisfies the policy’s written-notice requirement | Mother’s oral notice could suffice | Oral notice does not satisfy the written requirement | No; oral notice is insufficient |
| Whether the two-year delay in notice was legally justified | Delay justified due to ambiguity about coverage for pedestrians | Delay without justification; no coverage unless terms met | Remanded to determine ambiguity and justification facts by jury |
| Whether the trial court should have allowed a jury to decide resident-in-home status | Residence in parents’ home for coverage purposes should be jury-determined | Not addressed below; issue to be considered on remand | Not decided; remanded for proceedings not inconsistent with opinion |
Key Cases Cited
- Lankford v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 307 Ga. App. 12 (Ga. App. 2010) (policy language as a condition precedent to coverage)
- Gregory v. Allstate Ins. Co., 134 Ga. App. 461 (Ga. App. 1975) (policy language as condition precedent; inapplicable when insurer intervenes)
- Corbin v. Gulf Ins. Co., 125 Ga. App. 281 (Ga. App. 1972) (oral notice insufficient to written notice requirement)
- Gurley v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 163 Ga. App. 875 (Ga. App. 1982) (oral notice not sufficient under policy terms)
- Moss v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 154 Ga. App. 165 (Ga. App. 1980) (notice requirement evaluated under policy terms)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Sloan, 150 Ga. App. 464 (Ga. App. 1979) (issues of justification for notice delay; jury issues)