Court Opinion

ID: 9587172
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:18:47.009395+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:33:04.472269
License: Public Domain

DOYLE, Judge,
concurring specially.
Although I concur fully in all that is said in the majority opinion, on reconsideration I write separately to address Video Warehouse, Inc.’s argument that we erred in affirming the trial court’s finding that the insurance policy at issue did not cover the automobile accident involving Video Warehouse’s employee.
Video Warehouse contends that the facts in this case are identical to those of Yeomans & Assoc. Agency v. Bowen Tree Surgeons,16 in which an employer was sued over an automobile accident involving his employee. Although the insurance policy in Yeomans contained similar wording to the policy in the instant case, the procedural posture of Yeomans is distinguishable.
In Yeomans, we held that, “under the circumstances presented,” an insurance company breached its duty to the insured by failing to defend the insured when, at the time the personal injury complaint was filed, the insurance company was put on notice of facts that possibly could trigger coverage under the policy.17 In the instant case, however, Southern Trust Insurance Company already had undertaken the defense of Video Warehouse, and the trial court was asked in a declaratory judgment action to determine whether Southern Trust ultimately would be liable for any judgments against Video Warehouse with regard to the underlying event.18 Accordingly, Yeo-mans is inapposite and does not require a different result in this case.
I am authorized to state that Judge Adams joins in this special concurrence.

 274 Ga. App. 738 (618 SE2d 673) (2005).

 See id. at 740, 745. The insured failed to answer the personal injury complaint, and a default judgment was entered against them. Thereafter, the insured filed a claim against the insurance company for failure to defend the action.

 See id. at 741 (1) (a); see also Penn-America Ins. Co. v. Disabled American Veterans, 224 Ga. App. 557, 559 (481 SE2d 850) (1997) (“an insurer’s duty to pay and its duty to defend are separate and independent obligations”) (citations and punctuation omitted).