Federated Mut. Ins. Co. v. Pate

• Court: Georgia Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: WELTNER
• Citation: Federated Mut. Ins. Co. v. Pate, 329 S.E.2d 494, 254 Ga. 361 (Ga. 1985)
• Decision Date: 15 May 1985
• Docket Number: No. 41901,41901
• Parties: FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. PATE.

Page 494

329 S.E.2d 494

254 Ga. 361

FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. PATE.

No. 41901.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

May 15, 1985.

Rehearing Denied May 21, 1985.

James B. Hamilton, Fayetteville, for Federated Mut. Ins. Co.

David N. Rainwater, Roberts, Roberts & Rainwater, Cordele, for John Stephen Pate, Jr.

WELTNER, Justice.

Certiorari was granted to review Division 2 of the opinion of the Court of Appeals in Pate v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co., 173 Ga.App. 163, 325 S.E.2d 831 (1984), which held that a question of fact existed as to whether an insurance company had contracted to provide optional no-fault coverage to a policyholder, notwithstanding the inapplicability of Flewellen v. Atlanta Cas. Co., 250 Ga. 709, 300 S.E.2d 673 (1983). A recitation of fact appears in the opinion of the Court of Appeals.

We agree with the dissenting Court of Appeals judges that an essential element of the purported contract (to pay $26,464.24 in return for a $2,476 premium) is missing as a matter of law--absent the compulsion of Flewellen. A reading of the entire correspondence between the parties establishes that the parties intended to contract for this coverage only if Flewellen required the payment of $26,464.24. Flewellen is inapplicable, and the Court of Appeals should have affirmed the grant of the insurance company's motion for summary judgment. Peachtree etc....