McLarty v. Springfield Life Ins. Co., 24215

Decision Date20 October 1967
Docket NumberNo. 24215,24215
Citation157 S.E.2d 735,223 Ga. 707
PartiesNancy J. McLARTY v. SPRINGFIELD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Inc.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

Where in an equitable suit to enjoin a pending suit at law and to cancel an insurance policy, it appears that the plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law to defend against the pending action such equitable suit cannot be maintained.

Troutman, Sams, Schroder & Lockerman, Allen E. Lockerman, Gerald P. Thurmond, Atlanta, for appellant.

Henry M. Quillian, Jr., Bryan, Carter, Ansley & Smith, Charles C. Benedict, Atlanta, for appellee.

FRANKUM, Justice.

The appeal in this case is from an order of the Judge of the Superior Court of Fulton County enjoining and restraining the appellant from prosecuting an action on a sickness and accident insurance policy against the appellee in the Civil Court of Fulton County. It appears from the pleadings that the appellee, on August 4, 1965, issued to the appellant a policy of insurance insuring her against loss resulting from sickness contracted and commencing while the policy is in force and also against bodily injury resulting from accident occurring while the policy is in force. Attached to and made a part of the policy was the written application for insurance submitted by the appellant, containing answers to questions regarding the condition of her health at the time of and prior to the application. Appellee issued the policy in reliance upon the truthfulness of appellant's answers to the questions contained in the application. The policy contained a clause rendering it incontestable after it had been in force and effect for a period of two years during the lifetime of the insured. On the 28th day of February, 1967, the appellee filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County its equitable petition seeking a rescission and cancellation of the policy on the grounds of material misrepresentations by the defendant as to the prior state of her health as contained in the application for insurance. Thereafter, the appellee filed its supplemental petition for an injunction therein seeking to enjoin an action at law previously filed in the Civil Court of Fulton County wherein the defendant sought to recover from the insurance company certain medical, hospital and surgical expenses allegedly incurred by her for which she claimed the right to reimbursement under the terms of the policy. A rule nisi was issued on the petition for injunction, and on the date therein set the Judge of the Superior Court of Fulton County 'after the appearance of counsel for both parties, citation of authority and argument of counsel' ordered that further proceedings in the appellant's suit against the appellee then pending in the Civil Court of Fulton County be permanently enjoined and restrained, and 'that the Superior Court, Atlanta Judicial Circuit, takes jurisdiction of all issues in dispute between the parties.' In her appeal to this court the appellant contends that if appellee is entitled to the relief which it...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Empire Shoe Co. v. Regal Shoe Shops
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 30 Abril 1971
    ...where same is sought by a defendant as an affirmative defense. See House v. Oilver, 123 Ga. 784, 51 S.E. 722; McLarty v. Springfield Life Ins. Co., 223 Ga. 707, 157 S.E.2d 735; Garrison Motor Co. v. Parrish, 52 Ga.App. 766, 771, 184 S.E. 766. No Georgia authorities are cited directly in poi......
  • Freedman v. Scheer, 24213
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 20 Octubre 1967
    ... ... Wetter v. United Hydraulic Cotton Press Co., 75 Ga. 540(1a) ...         We hold, ... ...
  • Morton v. Gardner
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 23 Enero 1979
    ...party all the relief to which he is entitled, there is no ground for the exercise of equity's jurisdiction. McLarty v. Springfield Life Ins. Co., 223 Ga. 707, 157 S.E.2d 735 (1967); Alford v. Alford, 198 Ga. 424, 31 S.E.2d 785 These are the standards against which we should measure the clai......
6 books & journal articles
  • 1 Small Claim Cases
    • United States
    • State Bar of Georgia Georgia Benchbook 2023 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...as that would be ordering injunction or specific performance. b. Defendant may use "equitable defenses" to defend against liability [223 Ga. 707, 157 SE2d 735 (1967); 156 Ga.App. 513, 274 SE2d 850 (1980); 270 Ga.App. 93, 606 SE2d 112 (2004) (equitable defenses to dispossessory)]. c. Seeking......
  • 1 Small Claim Cases
    • United States
    • State Bar of Georgia Georgia Benchbook 2022 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...as that would be ordering injunction or specific performance. b. Defendant may use "equitable defenses" to defend against liability [223 Ga. 707, 157 SE2d 735 (1967); 156 Ga.App. 513, 274 SE2d 850 (1980); 270 Ga.App. 93, 606 SE2d 112 (2004) (equitable defenses to dispossessory)]. c. Seeking......
  • 1 Small Claim Cases
    • United States
    • State Bar of Georgia Georgia Benchbook 2016 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...court as that would be ordering injunction or specific performance. b. Defendant may use "equitable defenses" to defend against liability [223 Ga. 707, 157 SE2d 735 (1967); 156 Ga.App. 513, 274 SE2d 850 (1980); 270 Ga.App. 93, 606 SE2d 112 (2004) (equitable defenses to dispossessory)]. c. S......
  • 1 Small Claim Cases
    • United States
    • State Bar of Georgia Georgia Benchbook 2017 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...court as that would be ordering injunction or specific performance. b. Defendant may use "equitable defenses" to defend against liability [223 Ga. 707, 157 SE2d 735 (1967); 156 Ga.App. 513, 274 SE2d 850 (1980); 270 Ga.App. 93, 606 SE2d 112 (2004) (equitable defenses to dispossessory)]. c. S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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