A divided Georgia Supreme Court on March 6 ruled that plaintiffs reaching a settlement agreement with an insurer over a motor vehicle accident can require the performance of a specific action — in this case, the time-limited payment of the demand.
The ruling, in which two justices dissented, expands the array of conditions plaintiffs' attorneys may impose upon insurers, who may face bad-faith claims if they don't agree to settle within the statutory requirements of the law.
The majority opinion, written by Justice Nels Peterson, said an insurance company that otherwise met all of the settlement demands but failed to deliver the insured's policy limits due to an alleged address mistake had in fact failed to accept the offer.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Greg Land
Greg Land covers topics including verdicts and settlements and insurance-related litigation for the Daily Report in Atlanta.
