*1 Disciplinary the State Board.
All the Justices concur. 16, 1988.
Decided March Bar, Bridget B. III, Counsel State General William P. Smith Georgia Bar, Bar of State for State Counsel Bagley, Assistant General CROSBY, ABE THE OF JR. IN MATTER Disciplinary 526) No. (Supreme Court 41) Per curiam. reinstate- Crosby, petitioned Georgia
Abe
Jr.
the State Bar of
for
voluntarily surrendered his
practice
having
ment to the
of law after
of misdemeanor con-
license
1975. At that
time he was convicted
years in
was sentenced to five
spiracy
by taking,
theft
received a favorable rec-
prison.
petition
His
for reinstatement
Master,
Review
was denied
Special
ommendation
but
of sufficient
passage
due to lack of
Disciplinary
Panel of the
Board
In the Matter
time.
affirmed the Review Panel’s decision.
We
Crosby,
Reinstatement III, Bar, P. Counsel State Joe David William Smith General Jackson, Bar, of Geor- Assistant General Counsel State for State Bar gia. Groover, Jr., Crosby. Harry Thompson,
Denmark F. for COUNTY et al. 45155. WARD BULLOCH Clarke, Presiding I, II, appeal interpretation
At issue of Article Section is the Georgia IX the State of Paragraph of the Constitution of waives “.. recovery . as to those actions damages any departments claim the state or agencies for which such been pro- insurance for claims has but only any liability provided.” vided to the extent (Emphasis supplied.) Wayne Plaintiff during Ward suffered an incarceration *2 County county Bulloch Correctional Ward sued the Institute. the correctional institute from the alleging injury negli- resulted a gence employee. County of correctional pur- institute Bulloch had general liability chased a policy covering insurance acts of negligent employees. However, declaratory by judgment action the insurer determined the obligation insurer had no to defend this ac- tion, pay claim, or the county complied because the had not with the policy. notice terms of county the The waited seventeen months to present Ward’s claim the to insurer. No evidence of bad faith was offered. In granting summary defendants’ judgment the reinstated, trial court held sovereign immunity that had been since the insurer no obligation against pay had to defend or Ward’s claim. appeals grant summary Ward the judgment. of county required is purchase liability not is to insurance and however, sovereign immunity insurance; entitled to in the of absence purchase liability automatically the mere of insurance does not waive Rather, sovereign immunity. only sovereign immunity is waived when entity the insurer of a coverage pro state satisfies a claim under the contract, payment required vided. If is not under the and bad faith shown, has not Martin v. Ga. immunity. been there is no waiver of (357 Dept. 569) (1987). Safety, Public 257 303 SE2d Ga. of Judgment concur, All except the Justices Smith and affirmed. Weltner, JJ., who dissent. Justice, dissenting.
Smith, I disagree that, majority’s opinion with the purchase “the mere immunity.” automatically insurance does not waive sovereign “ insurance, ‘When a body purchased liability has there is no necessity for to the protection immunity provides the sovereign public.’ O’Neal, County, Ga. v. 254 Ga. 393 [Toombs 95) (1985)].” Dept. Safety, Martin v. Ga. Public 301 Ga. 569) (1987).
In coverage this case there no insurance was is contention that However, by waiting not in seven- effect at the time this claim arose. claim, county teen present appellant’s months to the the failed properly notify company, prop- not policy the insurance and the was erly no majority invoked. The in this situation there is holds that immunity. waiver is problem argument with this twofold. First, appellant the no relationship has contractual with the insurance company, given company. appellant to the Thus, if the had notice the lack ineffectual because of then this notification would have been relationship. appellant Second, the is the total at of a contractual county company. mercy county Thus, the could the insurance arbitrarily provided not insurance claim covered avoid company. notifying the insurance general light considerations, this case I would reverse In of these following grounds: on the county purchased liability and the con- insurance When the sovereign immunity issued, waived to was then was tract of insurance Dugger Sprouse, coverage. 257 Ga. extent of such insurance county has a claim because time effect at the of the
waiver of county company nor can revoke the waiver and neither the retroactively. joins dis-
I Justice in this am authorized to state that Weltner sent. *3 Copeland, Semler, D.
Webb, Carlock, Stair, & Robert C. Semler Gary appellant. Lovell, Jr., Edenfield, Gerald M. Becky Sasher, Taulbee, Franklin, J.
Franklin & James B. appellees. v. THE
45302. PORTER STATE. (365 SE2d Presiding Clarke, robbery Appellant the fel- Porter was convicted of the armed and ony Perkins, 27, murder of Sr. on June 1983. He received Willie years.1 prison sentence of life Mr. Perkins owned in and a term County. ponds property Lake on Perkins He stocked the Barrow 27, Appel August The crime on June 3. 1983. occurred 1983. indictment was 24, 1984, robbery February lant was convicted murder sentenced of armed on 23, consecutively. life A March to two sentences to be served motion for new trial was filed 1984, by represented A defender who had at trial. second motion 26, 1984, by attorney subsequently A third filed March who withdrew from the case. another 4, attorney filed an new trial December amendment motion for appeal was trial and A for new amended motion were denied December 1987. notice of 4, 1987, filed December case was docketed this court December January transcript was certified June 1984. The case was submitted for decision