Shea v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
| Decision Date | 01 March 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. A90A1646,A90A1646 |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
| Parties | SHEA et al. v. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY. |
Horne & Rice, M. Barton Rice, Jr., Dious, Bailey & Associates, I. Kenneth Dious, Athens, for appellants.
W. Christopher Bracken III, Atlanta, for appellee.
Charlotte Shea and Dr. Matthew McRae appeal from the trial court's judgment in favor of State Farm Fire & Casualty Company in an action on an open account. Shea and McRae were two of several partners in a general partnership which obtained workers' compensation insurance coverage from State Farm. State Farm sued the partners to recover past due earned premiums. After a bench trial, the trial court found that State Farm was entitled to recover premiums due on insurance policies which were in effect between March 1983 and April 1985.
Appellants complain that the trial court erred by ruling that the case was an action on account rather than a breach of contract claim, erred in finding for State Farm since appellants contend that State Farm did not prove its damages under a breach of contract theory, and erred in not finding that the incorporation of the partnership absolved appellants from personal liability to State Farm. Held:
1. Appellants complain that the trial court ruled that incorporation of a general partnership at will did not dissolve the partnership and that the incorporation of the general partnership did not bar individual liability of the former partners. The record shows, however, that the rulings of the trial court did not involve the principles which appellants now assert. In this instance, the trial court found that appellants, while operating as a partnership, contracted with State Farm to provide workers' compensation insurance and that after appellants incorporated they did not advise State Farm of the change in their status. Therefore, the premiums were debts of the partnership, and not the corporation. Moreover, since the judgment was for premiums due prior to the date on which State Farm became aware that the partnership had incorporated, the principles which appellants now assert have no application in this case. Under the circumstances, appellants remained personally liable for payments of the partnership's debts. Carnes v. Mobley's Tire, etc., Svc., 134 Ga.App. 913, 914, 216 S.E.2d 703. See Jones v. Burlington Indus., 196 Ga.App. 834, 835-838, 397 S.E.2d 174.
2. Although appellants contend that the trial court erred by ruling that this case was an open account, and not an action for breach of contract, the record shows a pattern of billings and payments by appellants. That was sufficient...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Ins. Fund v. GREAT PLAINS CARE CENTER, 96,024.
...concluded that an open account exists when the record shows a pattern of premium billings and payments. Shea v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 198 Ga.App. 790, 403 S.E.2d 81, 82 (1991). In one state an action to recover insurance premiums has been by a suit on a sworn account. Rudi's Automotiv......
-
Scott v. Hamilton Dorsey Alston Co.
...OCGA § 9-11-56(c); Concept-Nat. v. DiMattina Supply Co., 147 Ga.App. 865, 250 S.E.2d 552 (1978); see Shea v. State Farm, etc., Co., 198 Ga.App. 790, 791(2), 403 S.E.2d 81 (1991). Judgment BIRDSONG, P.J., and BEASLEY, J., concur. ...
-
Korey v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.
...formed corporation. See Jones v. Burlington Indus., 196 Ga.App. 834, 397 S.E.2d 174 (1990); see also Shea v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 198 Ga.App. 790, 403 S.E.2d 81 (1991); Carnes v. Mobley's Tire, Etc., Svc. 134 Ga.App. 913, 216 S.E.2d 703 Thus, Korey remains personally liable for t......