Hallum v. Provident Life and Acc. Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 14 April 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 01-15180.,01-15180. |
| Citation | 326 F.3d 1374 |
| Parties | Alton V. HALLUM, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Andrea Kuntzman Cataland, H. Sanders Carter, Jr., Carter & Ansley, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Glenn S. Bass, Goldner, Sommers, Scrudder & Bass, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Before BLACK and HULL, Circuit Judges, and LAZZARA*, District Judge.
In Hallum v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Co., 289 F.3d 1350 (11th Cir.2002), we certified the following question to the Georgia Supreme Court:
WHETHER, UNDER GEORGIA LAW, CARPAL TUNNEL SYNDROME, WHICH IS CAUSED BY REPETITIVE HAND MOTION, IS MORE PROPERLY CLASSIFIED AS AN "INJURY" UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF A DISABILITY INCOME INSURANCE POLICY WHICH DEFINE AN "INJURY" TO MEAN "ACCIDENTAL BODILY INJURIES OCCURRING WHILE YOUR POLICY IS IN FORCE," OR WHETHER CARPAL TUNNEL SYNDROME IS MORE PROPERLY CLASSIFIED AS A "SICKNESS" UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAME POLICY WHICH DEFINE "SICKNESS" TO MEAN "SICKNESS OR DISEASE WHICH IS FIRST MANIFESTED WHILE YOUR POLICY IS IN EFFECT?"
The Georgia Supreme Court, after a thorough review of our certified question, provided the following answer: "Under Georgia law, a person who unexpectedly suffers from carpal tunnel syndrome brought on by years of intentional repetitive hand motions that renders him disabled has suffered an `injury,' as that term is defined in this Provident Life insurance policy." Provident Life and Insurance Co. v. Hallum, 576 S.E.2d 849 (Ga.2003). The Georgia Supreme Court noted, however, that "[w]hether that legal standard is met as a matter of law in this case requires application of the federal rules governing summary judgment, which is a determination best made by the federal court." Id.
Given our prior review of the record, we conclude that the district court acted in accord with this legal standard in granting summary judgment in favor of Hallum under the "Injuries" provision of the policy.1 As we observed in our earlier opinion, one of Hallum's treating physicians "definitively state[d] that Hallum's CTS was aggravated by his job[,]" and another treating physician testified that this condition "was due to a repetitive motion disorder caused by [Hallum's] occupation... and that the condition developed over an extended period of time." Hallum, 289 F.3d at 1353. A third treating physician provided additional testimony that "given a patient with Hallum's medical and occupational history, he believed that CTS would be due to significant hand activity, such as surgery, over an extended period of time." Id. We also observed that "Provident did not offer any medical testimony or other evidence to contradict the testimony of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
BILEZIKJIAN v. UNUM LIFE INS. CO. OF AMERICA, Case No.: SA CV 07-1438 AHS (ANX).
...Policies. A virtually identical case under Georgia law involving a physician disabled by CTS so held. See Hallum v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 326 F.3d 1374 (11th Cir.2003). Second, coverage under the accidental bodily injury rider is consistent with California law, which recognize......
-
Miller v. Ppg Industries, Inc.
... ... Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 481 U.S. 58, 63-64 (1987). The ... ...
-
Vaughan v. Cox
...familiar standards as the district court to evaluate the Defendants' entitlement to summary judgment. Hallum v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 326 F.3d 1374, 1375-76 n. 1 (11th Cir.2003). We will address in turn each of Vaughan's arguments. III. DISCUSSION A. Vaughan's Fourth Amendment Cla......
-
Steward v. Mann
...court's grant of summary judgment, applying the same familiar standards as the district court. Hallum v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 326 F.3d 1374, 1375-76 n. 1 (11th Cir.2003). V. DISCUSSION As we noted above, the issues on appeal deal with the due notice requirement of 45 U.S.C. § 153......
-
Insurance - Stephen L. Cotter, Stephen M. Schatz, and Bradley S. Wolff
...21024 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 23, 2002). 121. Id. at *52. 122. Id. at *24. 123. 141 F. Supp. 2d 1266 (W.D. Wash. 2001). 124. Id. at 1268. 125. 326 F.3d 1374 (11th Cir. 2003). 126. Id. at 1375. 127. Id. 128. Id. at 1376. 129. Hallum v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 289 F.3d 1350, 1351 (11th Cir......