Muhammad v. Allstate Insurance Co.
313 Ga. App. 531
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- Allstate canceled Muhammad's homeowner policy after foreclosure; policy named Muhammad and Rick Muse as insureds; CHMC is Muhammad's corporation but not a named insured.
- Muhammad and CHMC sued Allstate for improper cancellation, seeking specific performance, damages, attorneys' fees, and costs; trial court dismissed for failure to state a claim; Muhammad pro se and CHMC represented by counsel on appeal.
- CHMC abandoned its appeal due to lack of counsel and standing; CHMC was not a party to the contract and had no insured interest; only an insured may sue on a policy.
- Motion to dismiss converted to summary judgment because the court considered evidence outside the pleadings; Muhammad failed to object and submitted his own affidavit.
- Insurable interest required under OCGA 33-24-4; chain of title shows foreclosure and transfer to CHMC, but record does not show CHMC (or Muhammad's) insurable interest; thus no triable issue and judgment for Allstate was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CHMC abandoned its appeal and lacks standing | CHMC filed a notice of appeal | CHMC did not timely file errors brief and is not represented | CHMC abandoned; no standing to appeal |
| Whether summary judgment was proper on insurable interest | Muhammad had insurable interest | Muhammad/Muhammad's CHMC lacked insurable interest | Summary judgment proper; no insurable interest established |
Key Cases Cited
- Eckles v. Atlanta Technology Group, Inc., 267 Ga. 801 (1997) (corporate representation by counsel required; non-attorney cannot represent corporation)
- Waller v. Rymer, 293 Ga. App. 833 (2008) (corporate party cannot appear pro se; must be represented by counsel)
- Cox Enterprises, Inc. v. Nix, 273 Ga. 152 (2000) (procedural rules on representation and filings cited)
- Sapp v. Ga. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 206 Ga. App. 209 (1992) (insurable interest principles in insurance actions)
- Gaddis v. Chatsworth Health Care Center, 282 Ga. App. 615 (2006) (insurable interest and standing considerations)