Mavity v. First of Georgia Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 22 May 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 42794,No. 1,42794,1 |
| Citation | 115 Ga.App. 763,156 S.E.2d 191 |
| Parties | James F. MAVITY v. FIRST OF GEORGIA INSURANCE COMPANY et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Gearinger & Vineyard, H. H. Gearinger, Chattanooga, Tenn., for appellant.
Cumming, Nixon, Eve, Waller & Capers, Samuel C. Waller, Augusta, Frank M. Gleason, Rossville, for appellees.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. Singuefield v. General Oglethorpe Hotel Co., 113 Ga.App. 326, 327, 148 S.E.2d 92, 94.
2. The provisions of Code Ann. § 56-1201(3) (Ga.L.1960, pp. 289, 500), authorizing venue for actions on any 'claim or demand' on insurance companies in any county where the company's 'agent or place of doing business was located at the time the cause of action accrued or the contract was made out of which such cause of action arose' (emphasis supplied), do not apply to tort actions. 'The object of the legislation is to fix the venue of actions against insurers on their contracts of insurance.' (Emphasis supplied.) Dependable Ins. Co. v. Gibbs, 218 Ga. 305, 313(3), 127 S.E.2d 454, 459.
3. Tort actions may be brought against any corporation chartered by authority of this State in the county where the cause of action originated only if the corporation has in such county an agent or, if there be none, then an agency or place of business. Code § 22-1102 (Ga.L.1884-5, p. 99); Tuggle v. Enterprise Lumber Co., 123 Ga. 480, 51 S.E. 433; Swift & Co. v. Lawson, 95 Ga.App. 35, 43(1)(a), 97 S.E.2d 168 and cases cited.
4. 'Where lack of jurisdiction appears on the face of the petition, it is proper to take advantage of such defect by demurrer.' Butler v. Winton, 56 Ga.App. 443, 448, 192 S.E. 835, 838 and cit.
5. Accordingly, where the petition in this libel action, brought in the Superior Court of Catoosa County, shows that the defendant insurance company's principal place of business is in Richmond County and that the plaintiff had been an agent of the defendants in Catoosa County at the time the alleged libelous letter was written, but was not their agent at the time the suit was filed, and fails to allege the existence of an agent, or an agency or place of business of the defendants in Catoosa County at the time the action was brought, the jurisdiction and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Carmichael Enterprises, Inc.
...360, 181 S.E. 2d 72 (1971); Ace Waterproofing Co. v. Tremco Manufacturing Co., Inc., supra note 6; Mavity v. First of Georgia Insurance Co., 115 Ga.App. 763, 156 S.E. 2d 191 (1967); Singuefield v. General Oglethorpe Hotel Co., 113 Ga.App. 326, 148 S.E.2d 92 (1966); Hutcheson Mfg. Co. v. Cha......
-
Travelers, Inc. v. Patterman
...§ 33-4-1(4). It has no application in a case such as this, proceeding under OCGA § 33-4-1(2). Similarly, Mavity v. First of Ga. Ins. Co., 115 Ga.App. 763(2), 156 S.E.2d 191 (1967), stands only for the proposition that the venue provisions of subsection (3) of OCGA § 33-4-1 do not apply to t......
-
C. W. Matthews Contracting Co., Inc. v. Capital Ford Truck Sales, Inc.
...Co., 123 Ga. 480, 51 S.E. 433 (1905); Swift & Co. v. Lawson, 95 Ga.App. 35(1)(a), 97 S.E.2d 168 (1957); Mavity v. First of Ga. Ins. Co., 115 Ga.App. 763, 156 S.E.2d 191 (1967). By its terms, Code Ann. § 22-5301 applied only to domestic corporations, leaving some confusion over the rule appl......
-
Hunton v. Colonial Pipeline Co., 50221
...123 Ga. 480, 51 S.E. 433; Swift & Co. v. Lawson, 95 Ga.App. 35, 43(1, a), 97 S.E.2d 168, and cases cited.' Mavity v. First of Georgia Insurance Co., 115 Ga.App. 763(3), 156 S.E.2d 191. Ga.Ann. (Code) § 22-1102 was reenacted without change in the Georgia Business Corporation Cdoe as § 22-530......