Georgia Interlocal Risk Management Agency v. GodfreyGeorgia Interlocal Risk Management Agency v. Godfrey
Under Georgia law, “motor vehicle liability insurance policies issued or delivered in this state” must include uninsured motorist
*131
coverage that encompasses “underinsured” motorist coverage.
Authorized by a 1986 law, an interlocal risk management agency may be created “for the development and administration of an interlocal risk management program and one or more group self-insurance funds.”
The stipulated facts show that on May 13, 2006, Daniel Godfrey, a Newnan police officer, was struck by a motor vehicle owned and operated by Hural Henderson, who had $25,000 of motor vehicle liability coverage. Godfrey and his wife filed a civil action against Henderson in state court and served a copy of the complaint on GIRMA in order to give notice that it might be held responsible as an uninsured motorist carrier pursuant to
*132
In Georgia, municipalities are protected by sovereign immunity; the legislature alone may waive it. Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. IX, Sec. II, Par. IX;
Although when discussing the waiver of immunity
Nothing in the rest of the 2002 legislation nor any other provision of the Georgia Code indicates that the legislature intended to waive municipal immunity in order to mandate the inclusion of uninsured/underinsured coverage where it is not included in the coverage afforded by a municipality’s participation in an interlocal risk management program. See also Ga. L. 2002, p. 579, § 6 (“All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.”). And, *133 as shown above, only the legislature may waive municipal immunity, which it has done but only to the limits of the coverage provided.
Moreover, during the debate that led to the passage of the 2002 legislation, the General Assembly twice considered amendments that would have added provisions bearing on uninsured motorist coverage, including a possible amendment to
In short, because underinsured coverage was not provided as a part of the GIRMA motor vehicle liability coverage afforded to Newnan, any attempt to require underinsured coverage under
Godfrey argues that the Supreme Court has held that a private self-insurance plan authorized by
But the statutory authority for these
private
self-insurance plans specifically requires that such plans “provide coverages, benefits, and claims-handling procedures substantially equivalent to those afforded by a policy of vehicle insurance in compliance with [Chapter 34 of Title 33].”
Finally, municipalities are not required to seek such motor vehicle liability coverage in the first place. The Insurance Code provides that a municipality may “in its discretion” secure and provide insurance to cover liability for damages “by reason of ownership, maintenance, operation, or use of any motor vehicle by the municipal corporation.”
In short, we find no authority for the conclusion that an interlocal risk management plan must include uninsured motorist coverage established in
Judgment reversed.
Notes
The 2002 legislation affected “
Self-insurance funds must be authorized by the commissioner and the commissioner is authorized to promulgate applicable rules and regulations:
No interlocal risk management agency shall establish a group self-insurance fund or funds until such agency has been issued a certificate of authority by the Commissioner of Insurance as provided in this Code section and under such rules and regulations as the Commissioner may promulgate to assure compliance with this chapter.
*134
A copy of each contract, endorsement, and application form proposed to be issued or used in connection with each fund. Such contracts, endorsements, applications, or revisions thereto shall be filed with and approved by the Commissioner prior to their use.