Darden v. Progressive Mountain Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 29 June 2022 |
| Docket Number | A22A0369 |
| Citation | 364 Ga.App. 600,876 S.E.2d 15 |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
| Parties | DARDEN v. PROGRESSIVE MOUNTAIN INSURANCE COMPANY et al. |
Following a traffic accident involving Gregory Darden and German Fandino Linares ("Fandino"), Darden filed a breach of contract suit against Progressive Mountain Insurance Company ("Progressive") and Ethio-American Insurance Company ("Ethio-American") (collectively "the defendants"). The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, and Darden now appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by (1) finding that Ethio-American's fleet taxi insurance policy and Fandino's Progressive policy for his personal vehicle both excluded coverage of the vehicle at issue at the time of the wreck; and (2) failing to find that public policy requires that liability insurance under one or both policies must be available to Darden under the facts of this case. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
[1]
The record shows that at approximately 6:30 a.m., on September 19, 2017, Darden, who did not have an uninsured motorist policy, was driving a rental car,[2] and he was injured in a wreck with a taxi driven by Fandino, who recently had ended his over-night shift and was en route to pick up breakfast before going home. Fandino deposed that he was turning left across a multi-lane road to a restaurant, and was hit by Darden, who was traveling through the right-most lane. At the time of the accident, neither person exhibited outward signs of injury, but Darden later was treated for injuries requiring several thousands of dollars of treatment. Pictures of Fandino's vehicle showed slight damage to the rear passenger-side door and quarter panel.
At the time of the accident, Fandino was driving a 2011 Honda Civic, which he had leased from Juan Phun for use as a taxi. The lease consisted of an oral agreement between Fandino and Phun, which agreement began approximately four weeks prior to the accident with Darden. Under the agreement, Fandino paid Phun $200 a week to lease the Civic.[3] Phun imposed no restrictions on the use of the Civic by Fandino, who was allowed to use it 24 hours a day and to drive it for personal tasks as well as transporting fares; Fandino deposed, however, that he used it only for taxi services.
Phun also supplied insurance from Ethio-American on the Civic and other vehicles he leased to other drivers. The policy listed specific vehicles as well as specific drivers to whom the policy applied. Phun had drivers come and go frequently, and in order to have them added to the policy when they leased a vehicle, he simply sent a copy of their drivers licenses to Ethio-American, which had rarely rejected a driver for insurance while he used the company. Usually Phun would go to the Ethio-American office and add drivers to the policy immediately when they began leasing a vehicle, but he deposed that he had an international trip scheduled approximately ten days after Fandino leased the Civic, and he failed to take Fandino's license to the insurance office prior to going on the trip. Fandino deposed that he had a Georgia drivers license and also had a personal vehicle (a Toyota Yaris) for which he had insurance under Progressive. Despite not adding Fandino to the policy, Phun gave Fandino a copy of an insurance card from Ethio-American for the Civic, and it was Fandino's understanding from Phun that he was covered by that insurance while he was driving the Civic.
After being notified of the accident, Progressive denied coverage to Fandino, stating that it would not cover the claim against him because the vehicle was being used as a taxi at the time of the incident. Ethio-American also denied coverage on the basis that Fandino was not a covered driver under its policy.
The policy specifically excluded coverage for "bodily injury or property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of any vehicle or trailer while being used: [A] to carry persons or property for compensation, fee, salary, or wages; [B] for retail or wholesale delivery; or [C] for ride-sharing activity."[5] It also excluded "bodily injury or property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of any vehicle owned by you or furnished or available for your regular use, other than a covered auto for which this coverage has been purchased."
After the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court determined that the facts surrounding the accident excluded the accident from coverage under both policies and granted summary judgment to Progressive and Ethio-American. This appeal followed.
1. Darden argues that the trial court erred by determining that the Ethio-American policy did not cover the accident. We disagree.
[I]n Georgia, insurance is a matter of contract, and the parties to an insurance policy are bound by its plain and unambiguous terms. Thus, when faced with a conflict over coverage, a trial court must first determine, as a matter of law, whether the relevant policy language is ambiguous. A policy which is susceptible to two reasonable meanings is not ambiguous if the trial court can resolve the conflicting interpretations by applying the rules of contract construction. Where a term of a policy of insurance is susceptible to two or more reasonable constructions, and the resulting ambiguity cannot be resolved, the term will be strictly construed against the insurer as the drafter and in favor of the insured. If a policy exclusion is unambiguous, however, it must be given effect even if beneficial to the insurer and detrimental to the insured. We will not strain to extend coverage where none was contracted or intended.[6]
In response to the proliferation of...
To continue reading
Request your trial