Wrightsman v. Hardware Dealers Mut. Fire Ins. Co.
| Citation | 113 Ga.App. 306,147 S.E.2d 860 |
| Decision Date | 25 February 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 41753,No. 1,41753,1 |
| Parties | Sidney R. WRIGHTSMAN v. HARDWARE DEALERS MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
Poole, Pearce & Cooper, Martin H. Rubin, Atlanta, for appellant.
James H. Weeks, C. B. Rogers, W. L. Spearman, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. Where in an insurance policy providing for the payment to those covered under the policy of reasonable medical expenses incurred on account of and within one year from any accident involving the insured automobile there is contained a provision that 'in the event of any payment under the Medical Expense Coverage of this policy, the company shall be subrogated to all the rights of recovery therefor which the injured person * * * may have against any person or organization and such (injured) person shall execute and deliver instruments and papers and do whatever else is necessary to secure such rights * * * (and) shall do nothing after loss to prejudice such rights,' such provision amounts to no more than an agreement that the injured person or persons covered under the provisions of the policy providing insurance for medical expenses shall, in the event of any payment thereunder, assign to the insurance company his claim against any third party tort feasor inflicting the injuries resulting in the medical expenses. First Nat'l Bank of Atl. v. American Surety Co., 71 Ga.App. 112, 119(1), 30 S.E.2d 402; Peller v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 220 Cal.App.2d 610, 34 Cal.Rptr. 41.
2. 'A right of action is assignable if it involves, directly or indirectly, a right of property; but a right of action for personal torts or for injuries arising from fraud to the assignor may not be assigned.' Code § 85-1805. Central R. & Banking Co. v. Brunswick & W.R. Co., 87 Ga. 386(1), 13 S.E. 520.
3. The subrogation provision of the contract set forth in the first headnote amounted to no more than an agreement to assign a personal injury claim to the insurer in the event of any payment under the terms of the medical payments coverage of the policy of insurance. As such it was void and of no effect, and being void it was not necessary that the plaintiff allege compliance therewith in order to recover under the medical payments coverage afforded by the policy of insurance sued on.
4. Furthermore, even if the subrogation provision relied upon by the defendant were valid, under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rinehart v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Idaho, Inc.
...(1966); Peller v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 220 Cal.App.2d 610, 34 Cal.Rptr. 41 (1963); Wrightsman v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 113 Ga.App. 306, 147 S.E.2d 860 (1966); Forsthove v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 416 S.W.2d 208 (Mo.App.1967); Travelers......
-
Silinsky v. State-Wide Ins. Co.
...dec. Dec. 27, 1965 and Block v. California Physicians' Service, 244 Cal.App.2d 266, 53 Cal.Rptr. 51; Wrightsman v. Hardware Dealers Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 113 Ga.App. 306, 147 S.E.2d 860; Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Chumbley, 394 S.W.2d 418 (Mo.App.); Forsthove v. Hardware Dealers Mut. Fire Ins......
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Reitler
...7 Cal.Rptr. 377; State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Farmers Ins. Exch. (Okl.1971), 489 P.2d 480; Wrightsman v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (1966), 113 Ga.App. 306, 147 S.E.2d 860; Travelers Indemnity Company v. Chumbley (Mo.App.1965), 394 S.W.2d 418; Forsthove v. Hardware Dealers ......
-
Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Vaccari, 45981
...495 (1966); Peller v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 220 Cal.App.2d 610, 34 Cal.Rptr. 41 (1963); Wrightsman v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 113 Ga.App. 306, 147 S.E.2d 860 (1966); Travelers Ind. Co. v. Chumbley, 394 S.W.2d 418 (Mo.App.1965); Lowder v. Okla. Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. ......