Garnett v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Decision Date31 August 1990
Citation567 So.2d 1265
PartiesJamie D. GARNETT v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY. 89-220.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Jay A. York of Drinkard, Sherling & York, Mobile, for appellant.

Mark E. Spear and Michael P. Windom of Brown, Hudgens, Richardson, Mobile, for appellee.

ALMON, Justice.

Jamie D. Garnett, a resident of Georgia, was injured in an automobile accident in Mobile, Alabama, while riding in an automobile that he and his wife had rented in Georgia. The accident occurred when another automobile struck the Garnetts' automobile from behind. The other driver had $25,000 liability insurance coverage, and Garnett settled his claim against her for that amount. The rental car was covered under a policy providing $20,000 uninsured motorist coverage, and the rental insurer paid that amount to Garnett. Garnett has an insurance policy with Allstate Insurance Company on three automobiles in Georgia. That policy provides $15,000 uninsured motorist coverage for bodily injury, and Garnett filed this action against Allstate, claiming $45,000 in "stacked" underinsured motorist coverage. Allstate moved for summary judgment, arguing that Garnett had already received from the rental car insurer more uninsured motorist coverage than he was entitled to receive under Georgia law and that, thus, Allstate did not owe any benefits under its uninsured motorist coverage. The trial court entered summary judgment for Allstate.

Allstate's liability under its contract is governed by Georgia law. Best v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 540 So.2d 1381 (Ala.1989); Davis v. Hartford Ins. Co. of Illinois, Inc., 456 So.2d 302 (Ala.1984); American Interstate Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Holliday, 376 So.2d 701 (Ala.1979).

The definitions in the Georgia Code of "uninsured motor vehicle" include one that effectively defines an "underinsured motor vehicle" as that term is used in this state. That definition, however, provides a method for calculating the available amount of coverage that achieves a result different from what would be available in this state. It provides that an "uninsured motor vehicle" is a motor vehicle as to which there is

"Bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance with limits of coverage which are less than the limits of the uninsured motorist coverage provided under the insured's insurance policy, but the motor vehicle shall only be considered to be uninsured for the amount of the difference between the limits of the bodily injury liability insurance and property damage liability insurance coverages on such motor vehicle and the limits of the uninsured motorist coverage provided under the insured's motor vehicle insurance policy."

Georgia Code, § 33-7-11(b)(1)(D)(ii).

The Georgia courts have held that an insured may not stack, or "pyramid," uninsured motorist coverage for multiple vehicles under a single policy unless the policy expressly allows such stacking. Georgia Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Owens, 178 Ga.App. 446, 343 S.E.2d 699 (1986); Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. O'Callaghan, 176 Ga.App. 135, 335 S.E.2d 407 (1985); Leader Nat. Ins. Co. v. Berry, 157 Ga.App. 627, 278 S.E.2d 170 (1981); Barnes v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 142 Ga.App 377, 236 S.E.2d 9 (1977). Garnett's Allstate policy expressly prohibits such stacking.

Georgia law does allow an insured to stack coverages under multiple policies of uninsured motorist coverage. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Murphy, 226 Ga. 710, 177 S.E.2d 257 (1970); Georgia Farm Bureau v. Owens, supra; State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hancock, 164 Ga.App. 32, 295 S.E.2d 359 (1982); Travelers Indem. Co. v. Williams, 119 Ga.App. 414, ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Ferris v. Jennings, Civ. A. No. 91-T-1382-N.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • December 28, 1993
    ...rejected the argument that such restrictions are unenforceable under the public policy of Alabama. In another case, Garnett v. Allstate Ins. Co., 567 So.2d 1265 (Ala. 1990), the Alabama Supreme Court explicitly held that enforcement of an uninsured motorist contract under Georgia law, which......
  • Terrell v. Damon Motor Coach Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • November 20, 2013
    ...every time Alabama's policy choices conflict with those of another state, lex loci delicti is abandoned. See Garnett v. Allstate Ins. Co., 567 So. 2d 1265, 1267 (Ala. 1990); Ailey v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 570 So. 2d 598, 599-600 (Ala. 1990); Caine, 95 So. 2d at 877 (all enforcing anothe......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT