FOURTH D I VI SI ON DOYLE, P. J.

, M I LLER and DI LLA RD, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s /

Nov em ber 18, 2014



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 4 A1 00 4 . KELLY v . HARRIS, et al

.

D I LLA R D , J u dg e.

In th i s ci v i l act i on ari s i ng fro m an au to m o b i l e acci d en t

, Th o m as Kel l y ap p eal s

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g r a n t of su m m ary ju d g m en t t o GEICO, h i s i n s uran ce carri er. On

ap p eal

, Kel l y arg u es th at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n fi n d i n g t hat GEICO was no t i n d efau l t

fo r i t s u n t i m el y an swer, t h at t h e n o t i ce p ro v i s i o n o f GEICO’ s i n su ran ce p o l i cy was

u n am b ig u o u s , an d t h at h e fai l ed t o co m p l y wi t h t h e p o li cy ’ s n o ti ce p ro vi s i o n as a

m at t er o f l aw. Fo r t h e reas o n s s et fo rt h in f r a , we co n cl u d e t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred in

fi nd i ng th a t G E I C O w a s n o t i n d efau l t

, an d th u s , we vacat e t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd ers

d e n yi n g K el l y ’ s m o t i o n fo r a d efau l t ju d g m en t an d g ran ti n g s um m ary ju d g m en t to

GEICO an d rem an d fo r fu rt h er p ro ceed i n gs co n s i s t en t wi t h t h i s o p i ni o n

.Vi ewed i n t h e l i g ht m os t fav o rab le to Kel l y ( i

. e. , t h e no n m ov i ng part y ), 1 t h e

reco rd s h o ws t h at o n M ay 2 5

, 2 0 1 1

, Kel ly an d Jo s ep h Harri s , an u n i ns u red m o t o ri s t

,

were i n vo l ved i n an au t o m o b i l e acci d en t

. Su b s eq u en tl y , on Oct o b er 3 0

, 2 0 1 2

, Kel l y

f i l e d a co m

p l ai n t fo r n eg l i g en ce ag ai n s t Harri s, al l eg i n g th at h e di d n o t y i el d w h e n

t u rn i ng l eft d irect l y

i nt o Kel l y ’ s p at h , t h ereb y cau s in g t h e co ll i si o n

.

At t he t i m e o f t h e a c ci d en t

, Kel ly was i n su red b y GEICO w i t h a p ol i cy t h at

p ro v id ed u n in s u red m o t ori st co v erag e. On Feb ru ary 1 3, 2 0 1 2, Kel l y no t i fi ed GEICO

t h at h e i n t en ded t o fi l e an i n s u ran ce cl ai m ari s i n g fro m t h e acci d en t. Aft er fi l i n g h i s

co m p l ai n t ag ai n s t Harri s o n Oct o b er 3 0

, 2 0 1 2

, Kel l y s erv ed G EICO wi t h a co p y o f

t h e s u m m o n s an d co m

p lai n t o n No v em

b er 5 , 2 01 2

.

GEICO fi l ed an an s w er o n Feb ru ary 1 4

, 2 0 1 3

, j o i n i n g t h e ci v i l act i o n as a

n am ed d efen d an t

. On J u l y 2 9

, 2 0 1 3

, GEICO m o v ed fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, arg u i n g

t h at Kel l y co u l d n o t p rev ai l b ecau s e h e fai l ed t o co m p l y wi t h th e n o ti ce p ro vi s i o n o f

h i s i ns u ran ce p o l i cy , w h ich req u i red t h at h e n ot i fy GEICO “ as s o o n as p o s si b l e aft er

t h e acci d en t

. ” Sp eci fi cal l y , G EICO arg ued th at Kel ly ’ s n o ti ce was u n t i m el y as a

1 S ee, e.g

. , McCa s ki l l v. Ca r i l l o , 2 6 3 Ga. A p p

. 8 9 0

, 8 9 0 (5 8 9 SE2 d 5 8 2 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (“ On ap p eal fro m t h e g ran t o r d en i al o f a m o t io n fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, w e rev i ew

t h e ev i d en ce d e n ov o , an d al l reas o n ab l e co n cl u s i o ns an d i n feren ces d rawn fro m t h e

ev i d en ce are co n s t ru ed i n t h e l ig h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e n o n m o v an t .”).

2m at t er o f l a w b e c a u s e i t was pro v i d ed m o re t h an ei g h t m on t h s aft er t h e acci d en t

.

Kel l y res p o n d ed

, arg u i n g t h at G EICO was i n d e f a u l t f o r fi l i n g an u n t i m el y an s wer

an d

, reg ard l es s , it s n o t i ce p ro v is i o n was am b i g u o u s an d t h u s u n en fo rceab l e. GEICO

l at er wi t h d rew i t s m o t i o n fo r s u m m a r y j u d g m en t an d fi l ed a n o ti ce o f el ect i o n to

p r o c e e d i n t h e n am e o f Harri s , t h e u n i n s u red m o t o ri s t

, i n s tead o f i n i t s o w n n am e.

Kel l y o b j ect ed t o GEICO’ s n o t i ce of el ect i o n , an d GEICO res p on d ed b y w i t hd rawi n g

t h e n o ti ce an d ren ewi n g i t s i ni ti al m o t i o n fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t. Kel l y

t hen fi l ed a

m o ti o n f o r d e fau l t ju d g m en t ag ai ns t GEICO, wh i ch t h e co u rt d en i ed

. Th en , aft er a

h e a ri n g , th e co u rt g ran t ed GEICO’ s ren ewed m o t i o n fo r s um m ary ju d g m en t

. Th i s

ap p eal fo l l o w s

.

To b eg i n wi t h

, we n o t e t h at s u m m ary ju d g m en t i s ap p ro p ri at e w hen “ t h e

m o vi n g p art y can s h ow t hat t h ere i s n o g en ui n e i s s u e o f m at eri al fact an d t h at t h e

m o van t i s en ti t l ed t o ju d g m en t as a m at t er o f l aw.” 2 A d efen d a n t m e e t s t hi s b u rd en

wh en t h e co u rt i s sh o wn t h at “ t h e d ocu m en t s, affi d av i t s , dep o si t io n s an d o t h er

ev i d en ce i n t h e reco rd rev eal th at t h ere i s n o ev id en ce s u ffi ci en t t o creat e a ju ry i s s u e

2 Al b er t s o n v. Ci ty o

f Jes u p , 31 2 G a. Ap p. 2 4 6, 2 4 8 (7 1 8 SE2 d 4 ) (2 0 1 1 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

3o n at leas t o n e es s en ti al el em en t o f t h e p l ai n t iff’ s cas e.” 3 Fi n al l y , i f t h e m ov i n g p art y

s a t i s fi es t h i s b u rd en , “ t h e n o n m o v i n g p art y can no t res t o n i t s p l ead i n g s , b u t m u s t

p o i n t t o s p eci fi c ev i d en c e gi v i n g ri s e t o a t ri ab le i s s ue.” 4 W i t h th es e g u i d i n g

p ri n ci p l es i n m i n d , we t u rn n o w t o Kel l y ’ s en u m erat i o n s o f erro r.

1

. K el l y fi rs t arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n fi n d i n g th at GEICO was n o t in

d efau l t fo r fi l i n g an un t i m el y an s wer. Sp eci fi cal l y , h e c o n t e n ds th at t h e co u rt

erro neo u s l y rel i ed u po n a t y p o g rap h i cal erro r co n t ai n ed i n Lewi s v. W a l l er 5 to

co n cl u d e t h at GEICO’ s an swer was t i m el y

.

W e ag ree wi t h Kel l y t h at

, i n fi n d i n g t h at GEICO’ s an s w er was t i m el y fi l ed

, t h e

t r i al co urt rel i ed u p o n a t y p o g rap h i cal erro r i n Lewi s

. In deed

, i n i t s o rd er g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, t h e t ri al co u rt q uo t ed ou r o p in i o n i n Lewi s , wh i ch n o t es t h at “ to

t h e ex t en t t h at t h e [u n i n s ured m o t o ri s t carri er (“ UM C”)] p u rp o rt s t o act d i rect l y i n i t s

o wn n am e, i t s an s w er i s t i m el y i f fi l ed wi t h i n 3 0 d ay s fro m s erv i ce o f t h e an s wer an d

co m p l ai n t u p o n t he UMC. ” 6 An d i n rel y i n g u p o n t hi s lan g u ag e, t h e t ri al co u rt fo u n d

3 Id

. (p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ).

4 Id

. (p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ).

5 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p . 8 (6 3 7 SE2 d 5 0 5 ) (2 0 0 6 ).

6 Id

. at 1 2 (1 ) (b ) (em

p h as i s s u p p l i ed i n p art ).

4t h at GEICO was no t i n d efau l t becau s e it s an swer was t i m el y fi l ed wi t h i n 3 0 d ay s o f

Harri s ’ s an s wer. Ho wev er, i n t he ab o v e-ci t ed q u ot e fro m Lewi s , t h e p h ras e “ a n s wer

an d co m p l ai n t ” s h ou l d act ual l y read “ su mmo n s an d co m p l ai n t ,” an d we tak e t h i s

o p p o rt u ni t y

t o ack n o wl ed ge an d co rrect t h i s t y p o g rap h i cal erro r.

At t h e o ut s et

, we n o t e t hat i m m ed i at el y fo l l o wi n g t h e ab ov e-ci t ed l an g u ag e

fro m Lewi s , we c o n c lu d ed t h at t h e UM C’ s an s wer was t im el y b ecau s e i t was fi l ed

wi t h i n 3 0 d ay s o f wh en t h e UM C was s erv ed wi th “ th e s u mmo n s an d c o m p l ai n t

. ” 7

An d in s u p p o rt o f th i s co ncl u s i o n i n Lewi s , we ci t ed H o me In d emn it y Co

. v. Th o ma s , 8

wh i ch h el d t h at

,

t o t h e ex t en t t hat [an i n s u rer] m ay p u rp o rt t o act d i rect ly i n i t s o wn

n am e, an d t h ereb y el ect t o as s u m e t h e s t at u s of a nam ed p art y , we t h i n k

t h e ru l es o f pract i ce an d p ro ced u re ap p l y t o i t co m m en ci n g wh en s erv i ce

i s p erfect ed as th o u g h act u al l y n am ed as a p art y d efen d an t

, an d t h u s , t o

p res erv e i t s ri g h t s as t o t h i s st at u s, i t m u s t act wi t h in t h e t i m e p ro v i d ed

b y l aw t o av o i d d e f

a u l t

, an d fai l i n g t o d o s o , i t is i n n o b et t er p os i t i o n

t h an a d efau l t in g p art y

. 9

7 Id

. (em p h as i s s u p p l i ed ).

8 1 22 Ga. Ap p

. 6 4 1 (1 7 8 SE2 d 2 9 7 ) (1 9 7 0 ); s ee Lewi s , 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p

. at 1 2 (1 ) (b ).

9 Ho me In dem. Co

. , 1 22 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 4 1 ; s ee a l so OCGA § 9

- 1 1

- 1 ( “ Th i s ch ap ter g o v ern s t h e p ro ced u re i n al l co u rt s of reco rd o f th i s st at e i n a l l a c t i o n s o f a

5Acco rd in g ly

, Lewi s an d Ho me In d emn i t y Co

. fi rm l y es t ab l i s h t h at

, o nce GEICO was

s erv ed wi t h t h e su m

m o ns an d co m

p l ai nt

, i t wa s t h en s u b

ject t o Geo rg i a’ s ru l es o f

p ract i ce an d p ro ced u re t h at ap pl y t o e v e r y o t h er l i t i g an t

. 1 0 In d eed

, s u ch a res u l t i s

en t i rel y co n s is t en t wi t h o u r Su prem e Co u rt ’ s co n cl u s i o n t hat , “ [a] l t ho u gh [a] UM C

s h o u ld n o t b e p l aced i n a wo rs e p o s i t i o n t han t h e al l e g e d t o r t f e a s o r fo r wh o s e

n eg li g en ce i t m ay u l ti m at el y b e h el d fi n a n c i al l y res p o n s i b l e, i t l i k ewi s e s h o u l d n ot

b e p l aced i n a b et t er p os i t i o n .” 1 1

Here, G EICO was s erv ed wi th t h e co m p lai n t o n No v em

ber 5

, 2 0 12

, b u t i t fi l ed

i t s an s wer 1 0 1 d ay s l at er o n Feb ru ary 1 4

, 2 01 3

. A n d in Geo rg i a, a d efen d an t s h al l

s erv e h i s an s w er “ wi t h i n 3 0 d ay s aft er t h e s erv i c e o f t h e s u m m o n s an d co m

p l ai nt

ci v i l n at ure wh et h er co g n i zab l e as cas es at law or i n eq u i t y , wi t h t h e ex cep ti o n s s t at ed

i n Co d e Sec t i o n 9

- 1 1

- 8 1 .”); cf

. Ha l l v. Reg a l In s

. Co

. , 2 0 2 Ga. Ap p

. 51 1

, 5 1 3 (4 1 4

SE2 d 6 69 ) (1 9 9 1 ) (“ Th e ri gh t [o f an u ni n s u red m o t o ri s t carri er] t o p art i ci p at e d i rect l y i n t he p ro ceed i n gs i n cl u des t h e ri g ht t o en g ag e i n d is co v ery i n acco rd an ce wi t h t h e

p ro v is i o n s o f ap p l i cab l e d i s co v ery s t at u t es .”).

1 0 S ee Lewi s , 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p

. at 12 (1 ) (b ); Ho me In d em. C o

. , 1 2 2 G a

. Ap p

. at
6 4 1

.

1 1 S t ou t v. Ci n ci nn at i I n s

. Co

. , 2 69 Ga. 6 11

, 6 1 2 (5 0 2 SE2 d 2 2 6 ) (1 9 9 8 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

6u p o n h i m , u n l e ss o t h erwi s e p ro v i d ed b y s t at u t e. “ 1 2 M o reo ver, t o av o i d a d efau l t

ju d g m en t

, a part y m

u s t m o v e t o o p en t h e d efau l t as a m at t er o f ri g h t wi t h i n t h e n ex t

1 5 day s aft er d efau l t i ng o r at an y t i m e b efo re a fi n al ju d g m e n t s u bject t o t h e t ri al

c o urt ’ s d i s cret i o n

. 1 3 T h u s , co n t rary t o t h e t ri al co urt ’ s fi n d i n g s, GEICO was i n d e e d

i n d efau l t b ecau s e i t fi l ed it s an s wer wel l o v er 3 0 d ay s aft er i t recei v ed s erv i ce o f t h e

co m p l ai n t , an d i t n ev er m o ved t o o p en d efau l t u nd er OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (a) o r (b ). 1 4

Th en , aft er rel y i n g u po n t h e t yp o g r a p h i cal erro r i n Lewi s t o det erm i n e t h at

GEICO’ s an s wer was t im el y , t h e t ri al co u rt fu rt her fo u n d t h at b ecau s e t h e Un i n s u red

M o t o ri s t Act 1 5 al lo w s a UM C t o f i le n o an swer wh at s o ev er, s u b ject in g a UM C to

d efau l t fo r fi l i n g a l at e an s wer wo u l d l ead t o t he “ i l l o g i cal res u lt ” t hat a UM C fi l i n g

an an s wer aft er 3 0 d ay s wo u l d b e i n a wo rs e p o s i ti o n t h an a U M C t h at n ev er fi l es an

an s wer. An d si m i l arl y , GEICO arg u es o n ap p eal th at al l o wi n g a UM C to d efau l t fo r

1 2 S ee OCGA § 9-1 1 -1 2 (a); s ee a l s o Ca ven d

er v. Ta yl o r , 2 85 Ga. 7 2 4, 7 2 4 (1 ) (6 8 1 SE2 d 1 3 9 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

1 3 OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 5 (a), (b ).

1 4 W e d o n o t fau l t t h e t ri al co u rt fo r rel y i n g u p o n t h e t y p o grap h i cal erro r

co n tai n ed i n Lewi s

. An y fau l t i n t hat reg ard l i es s q uarel y wi t h t h i s Co urt

.

1 5 S ee OCGA § 3 3 -7 -1 1 et

s eq

.

7fi li n g a l at e an swer wo u l d “ u n rav el t h e fl ex i b i li t y ” p ro v i d ed t o i n s u ran ce co m p an i es

u n d er OCGA § 33 -7 -1 1 (d ). W e d i s ag ree.

In rel ev an t p art

, Geo rg i a’ s Un i n s u red M ot o ri s t Act req ui res t h at

, in p ers o n al

i n j u r y a c t i o n s i n wh i ch a d efen d an t i s k no wn o r reas o n ab l y b el i ev ed t o b e an

u n i n s u r e d m o t o ri s t

, t h e p l ai n t i ff m u s t s erv e h i s o r h er i n s urer wi t h a co p y o f t h e

co m p l ai n t

. 1 6 Fu r t h e r , i n th e cas e o f a kn o w n own er or o p erat o r o f an u n i n s u red

v eh icl e, “ ei t h er o r b o t h o f wh o m are n am ed as a d efen d an t i n s u ch act i o n , t h e

i n s u ran ce co m

p an y i s s u i n g t h e p o l i cy s h a l l h ave t h e r i g h t t o fi l e p l ead i n g s an d t ak e

o t h er act i o n al l o w ab l e b y l aw i n t h e n am e o f ei t h er t h e k n own o wn er o r o p erat o r o r

b o t h o r i t s el f.” 1 7 Th u s , u nd er t h e p l ai n l an g u ag e o f t h e s t at u t e, o n ce a UM C i s s erv ed

wi t h a co m

p l ai n t a g a i n s t an u n i n s ured m o to ri st

, i t h as t h e o p ti o n t o jo i n th at act i o n

b y fi l i n g an an s wer, b u t i t i s n o t req u i red t o d o s o

. 1 8 An d i f t h e UM C el ect s n o t t o jo in

as a p art y , i t m ay t h en l it i g at e i t s co n t ract d i s p u t es s ep arat el y i n an y “ act i on al l o wab l e

1 6 S ee OCGA § 3 3 -7 -1 1 (d ).

1 7 S ee i d

. (em p h as i s s u p pl i ed ).

1 8 S ee S in gl et o n v. Ph i l l i

p s , 2 2 9 Ga. Ap p . 2 8 6 , 2 8 8 (2 ) (4 9 4 SE2 d 6 6 ) (1 9 9 7 ) (n o t i ng th at u n d er OCGA § 3 3 -7 -1 1 (d ), a UM C m ay “ el ect t o b eco m e a p art y t o t h e

cas e b y fi l i n g an an s wer i n i t s o wn n am e”).

8b y l aw.” 1 9 A s s u ch

, wh i le we cert ai n l y ag ree t h at t h e Un i n s ured Mo to ri st A ct g i v es

i n s u ran ce co m

p an i es wi d e l at i tu d e i n d eci d i n g wh et h er to jo i n a l aws u i t ag ai n s t a n

u n i n s u red m ot ori st

, GEICO ci t es t o n o s t at u t o ry l an g u a g e o r cas e l aw (an d we fi n d

n o n e) rem o t el y s u g g es t i n g t h at o n ce a UM C vo l u n t ar i l y b eco m es a p art y t o a l aws u i t

i t i s ex em

pt fro m fu l ly co m

p l y i n g w i t h t h e d i ct at es o f t h e C i v il Pract i ce Act

.

M o reo v er, req u i ri n g U M Cs t o fo l l o w s u ch p ract i ces an d p ro ced u res i n n o way

“ u n rav el s ” t h e fl e x i b i l i t y t h at th ey are affo rd ed u n d er t h e Un i n s u red M ot o ri s t Act

.

In d eed

, r e q u i r i n g UM Cs t o fo l l o w t he s am e ru l es o f ci v i l p ro ced u re t hat ap p l y to

ev ery o th er l i t i g an t d o es n o t l i m i t or i m p e d e t hei r ab i l i t y u n d er t h at st at u t o ry

fram ewo rk t o op t -i n or o p t -o u t o f l i t i g at i o n

. In an y ev en t

, GEICO’ s co nt en t i o n t h at

a UM C can nev er b e i n d efau l t i s d i r ect l y at o d d s wi th ou r p ri o r d eci si o n s i n Lewi s

an d Ho me In d

emn i t y, Co

. , wh i ch h o l d ot h erwi s e an d g o vern th e ou t c o m e o f t h i s

ap p eal

. 2 0

In s u m , t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd ers d en y i n g Kel l y ’ s m ot i o n fo r a defau l t ju d g m en t

an d g ran ti n g GEICO’ s m o t i on fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t were p rem i s ed

, at l eas t i n p art

,

1 9 OCGA § 3 3 -7 -1 1 (d ).

2 0 S ee Lewi s , 2 8 2 Ga. Ap p

. at 12 (1 ) (b ); Ho me In d em. Co

. , 1 2 2 G a

. A p p

. at
6 4 1

.

9o n th e t ri al co urt ’ s rel ian ce u p o n a t yp o g rap h i cal erro r i n Lewi s an d it s erro n eo u s

b el i ef t h at a UM C can n ev er b e in d efau l t

. As s u ch

, we v acat e t h o se o rd ers an d

rem an d t h e cas e fo r t h e t r i al co u rt t o det erm i n e wh et h er GEICO’ s d efau lt s h o u ld

s t an d an d t h en p ro ceed acco rd i n g l y b as ed o n t h at d et erm i n at i o n

.

2

. Gi v en o u r h ol d i n g i n Di v i s i o n 1

, s u p r a , we n e e d n o t ad dres s Kel l y ’ s

arg u m en t t h at t he t ri al co u rt erred i n res o l v i ng t h e co n tract d i s p u t e s i n GEICO’ s

fav o r.

Fo r al l o f t h e fo reg o i n g reas o n s , we v acat e t h e t ri a l c o u r t ’s d en i al of Kel l y ’ s

m o ti o n fo r a defau l t ju d g m en t an d i t s g ran t o f GEICO’ s m o t i o n fo r s u m m ary

ju d g m en t an d rem an d fo r fu rt h er p ro ceed i n g s co n s is t en t wi th t h i s o p i n i o n

.

Ju d g men t va ca t ed a n d ca s e r ema n d ed wi t h d i r ect i o n

. Do

yl e, P. J., a n d Mi l l er

,

J., co n cu r.

10