Court Opinion

ID: 9849776
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:46:08.740505+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:25.880743
License: Public Domain

Deen, Judge,
dissenting. Where provisions of the contract are clear and free of ambiguity we can afford them no construction save that which they clearly import. Great Amer. Ins. Co. v. Lipe, 116 Ga. App. 169, 174 (156 SE2d 490). Where the meaning is plain and obvious, the contract should be construed as literally provided therein. Hansen v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 116 Ga. App. 528, 530 (157 SE2d 768).
As pointed out in Wise v. American Cas. Co., 117 Ga. App. 575, 576, supra, “the quoted exclusionary clause did not preclude benefits under the policy only in the event that the workmen’s compensation was actually paid to the insured and retained by him. It provided an exclusion if compensation was payable.” In the case sub judice facts are stipulated clearly showing that medical benefits of the insured person were provided for by “any other employer” making mandatory the non-duplication exclusionary clause prohibiting duplicate benefits for medical expenses.
“The defendant argues that the benefits paid under the group plan covering her husband were not received by her and were not her property but were paid to her husband and were his sole property and that she can not be held liable for them. The fal*413lacy in this argument is that the policy is silent as to payments; it refers only to ‘benefits provided under any employer group plan other than this plan.’ The mere fact that there exists any other employer group plan under which benefits are provided for the defendant’s medical expenses is sufficient for the purposes of exclusion (k).” Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Smith, 6 Life Cases (2d) 1337 (CCH), supra. And see DiMauro v. Aetna Ins. Co., 116 Conn. 246, 248, supra.
The judgment of the trial court limiting plaintiff’s recovery to $516.77 should be affirmed.
I am authorized to state that Felton, C. J., Eberhardt and Quillian, JJ., concur in this dissent.