Hoffman v. Insurance Co. of North America
| Decision Date | 05 December 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 54666,No. 1,54666,1 |
| Citation | 241 S.E.2d 303,144 Ga.App. 420 |
| Parties | H. H. HOFFMAN et al. v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Phillips, Hart & Mozley, J. Arthur Mozley, Donald R. Andersen, Atlanta, for appellants.
Long, Weinberg, Ansley & Wheeler, Charles M. Goetz, Jr., Robert G. Tanner, Hunter S. Allen, Jr., Atlanta, for appellees.
This is a suit to recover under an automobile policy issued by defendant INA to plaintiff Epps Air Service or in the alternative, if no coverage was found to exist, for recovery against defendant Thompson, an independent insurance agent of plaintiff, for negligent breach of its fiduciary duty to secure appropriate liability coverage for plaintiff Epps.
The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendant agent but denied the insurer's motion. Plaintiffs appeal from the order granting summary judgment to the agent.
One of the defenses asserted by the agent was that plaintiffs' claim was barred by the statue of limitations. The material facts as to this issue are not in dispute. Plaintiff Epps requested the defendant to procure automobile coverage for it prior to March 1971. In September 1971, plaintiff Hoffman, an employee of Epps, was driving his own car on Epps' business and was involved in a collision with a third party. Hoffman's car was being used at the time as a temporary substitute for another vehicle belonging to Epps which had been withdrawn from service for repairs. A suit arising out of this collision was filed by the third party against both of the plaintiffs in this case. Defendant INA denied coverage under the automobile policy procured by the agent as the policy did not provide for or cover the use of a nonowned automobile. The agent admitted that it did not procure any coverage for plaintiff Epps for use of a nonowned automobile. The case by the third party against plaintiffs was tried in June 1975 and a judgment was obtained against these plaintiffs. The present suit was filed on October 6, 1975. Held :
Plaintiffs assert that they relied on the professional expertise of the agent in procuring the appropriate coverage, and the failure to do so constituted the breach of duty. In cases involving malpractice claims against attorneys, the rule has been established that the claim accrues and the statute commences to run from the date of the breach of the duty, and not from the time when the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hamilton v. Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, 65663
...of action sounding in tort as well as in contract. Cf. Hoffman v. Ins. Co. of N.A., 241 Ga. 328, 245 S.E.2d 287 (1978), revg. 144 Ga.App. 420, 241 S.E.2d 303 (1977); Mattair v. St. Joseph's Hospital, 141 Ga.App. 597, 234 S.E.2d 537, affd. St. Joseph's Hospital v. Mattair, 239 Ga. 674, 238 S......
-
Occidental Fire & Cas. of N.C. v. Goodman
...against the insured. Instead, the crux of Hoffman was to reject and reverse this court's ruling in Hoffman v. Ins. Co. of North America , 144 Ga.App. 420, 241 S.E.2d 303 (1977), which relied on the rule in attorney malpractice cases that the claim accrues and the statute of limitation begin......
-
Hoffman v. Insurance Co. of North America
...Jr., Robert G. Tanner, T. M. Smith, Jr., Atlanta, for appellees. MARSHALL, Justice. We granted certiorari in Hoffman v. Ins. Co. of N. A., 144 Ga.App. 420, 241 S.E.2d 303 (1977), wherein the Court of Appeals held that the statute of limitation in a suit by an insured against its agent, for ......
-
Long v. Wallace
...the date of the attorney's breach of duty, that is, from the date of the alleged negligent or unskillful act. Hoffman v. Ins. Co. of N. America, 144 Ga.App. 420 (241 SE2d 303); Master Mortgage Corp. v. Byers, 130 Ga.App. 97 (202 SE2d 566)." Riddle v. Driebe, 153 Ga.App. 276, 279, 265 S.E.2d......