 |
GEORGIA CODE (Last Updated: August 20, 2013) |
 |
Title 33. INSURANCE |
|
|
Chapter 5. REGULATION OF UNAUTHORIZED INSURERS |
|
|
Article 3. UNAUTHORIZED INSURERS PROCESS ACT |
| § 33-5-50. Short title; construction |
| § 33-5-51. Purpose of article |
| § 33-5-52. Acts by insurer which constitute appointment of Commissioner as agent for service |
| § 33-5-53. Service of action and process upon Commissioner; sending of notice of service to defendant; applicability |
| § 33-5-54. Service of process upon solicitor, collector, or other agent of insurer. |
| § 33-5-55. Mode of service prescribed by article cumulative |
| § 33-5-56. Right of plaintiff or complainant to default judgment or judgment with leave to prove damages |
| § 33-5-57. Conditions precedent to filing of pleadings by insurer generally; granting of postponements; filing by insurer of motion to quash writ or set aside service |
| § 33-5-58. Recovery of penalty and attorney's fees by plaintiff; effect of failure of insurer to defend action |
| § 33-5-59. Applicability of article |
REFS & ANNOS
TITLE 33 Chapter 5 Article 3 NOTE
CROSS REFERENCES. --Service of process on alien or foreign insurers, § 33-4-3 et seq. Venue of actions against and service of process upon unauthorized insurers issuing surplus line policies, § 33-5-34.
LAW REVIEWS. --For comment on McGee v. International Life Ins. Co., 355 U.S. 220, 78 S. Ct. 199, 2 L. Ed. 2d 223 (1957), holding that for a state to assert jurisdiction over a foreign insurance company it is sufficient for due process purposes if the contract on which the case is based has a substantial connection with that state, see 21 Ga. B.J. 113 (1958).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
PURPOSE. --This article is not punitive in nature but is intended, among other purposes, to protect residents of Georgia from the often insuperable obstacle of resorting to distant forums for the purpose of asserting legal rights. Retail Union Health & Welfare Fund v. Seabrum, 240 Ga. 695, 242 S.E.2d 18 (1978).
THIS ARTICLE PROVIDES A METHOD OF SUING IN THIS STATE UNAUTHORIZED INSURERS who write insurance on property having a situs in this state. Reeves v. South Am. Managers, Inc., 110 Ga. App. 49, 137 S.E.2d 700 (1964), aff'd, 220 Ga. 493, 140 S.E.2d 201 (1965).
THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT PURPORT TO DEAL WITH THE QUESTION OF VENUE of suits against insurance companies, but only with the mode of service of process upon unauthorized insurers. Liberty Bell Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Exum, 209 Ga. 548, 74 S.E.2d 738 (1953).
INSURANCE AUTHORIZING SERVICE UNDER ARTICLE IS WRITTEN IN VIOLATION OF CHAPTER. --Surplus line coverage in accordance with Art. 2 of this chapter is issued in accordance with this chapter, while insurance written in a manner which authorizes service under this article is written in violation of and not in accordance with this chapter. Reeves v. South Am. Managers, Inc., 110 Ga. App. 49, 137 S.E.2d 700 (1964), aff'd, 220 Ga. 493, 140 S.E.2d 201 (1965).
CITED in Gordy Tire Co. v. Dayton Rubber Co., 216 Ga. 83, 114 S.E.2d 529 (1960); Rossville Crushed Stone, Inc. v. Massey, 219 Ga. 467, 133 S.E.2d 874 (1963).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
ALR. --Collateral business activities incident to, or in aid of, interstate transportation, as related to interstate commerce, 152 ALR 1078.
LAW REVIEWS. --For comment on McGee v. International Life Ins. Co., 355 U.S. 220, 78 S. Ct. 199, 2 L. Ed. 2d 223 (1957), holding that for a state to assert jurisdiction over a foreign insurance company it is sufficient for due process purposes if the contract on which the case is based has a substantial connection with that state, see 21 Ga. B.J. 113 (1958).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
PURPOSE. --This article is not punitive in nature but is intended, among other purposes, to protect residents of Georgia from the often insuperable obstacle of resorting to distant forums for the purpose of asserting legal rights. Retail Union Health & Welfare Fund v. Seabrum, 240 Ga. 695, 242 S.E.2d 18 (1978).
THIS ARTICLE PROVIDES A METHOD OF SUING IN THIS STATE UNAUTHORIZED INSURERS who write insurance on property having a situs in this state. Reeves v. South Am. Managers, Inc., 110 Ga. App. 49, 137 S.E.2d 700 (1964), aff'd, 220 Ga. 493, 140 S.E.2d 201 (1965).
THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT PURPORT TO DEAL WITH THE QUESTION OF VENUE of suits against insurance companies, but only with the mode of service of process upon unauthorized insurers. Liberty Bell Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Exum, 209 Ga. 548, 74 S.E.2d 738 (1953).
INSURANCE AUTHORIZING SERVICE UNDER ARTICLE IS WRITTEN IN VIOLATION OF CHAPTER. --Surplus line coverage in accordance with Art. 2 of this chapter is issued in accordance with this chapter, while insurance written in a manner which authorizes service under this article is written in violation of and not in accordance with this chapter. Reeves v. South Am. Managers, Inc., 110 Ga. App. 49, 137 S.E.2d 700 (1964), aff'd, 220 Ga. 493, 140 S.E.2d 201 (1965).
CITED in Gordy Tire Co. v. Dayton Rubber Co., 216 Ga. 83, 114 S.E.2d 529 (1960); Rossville Crushed Stone, Inc. v. Massey, 219 Ga. 467, 133 S.E.2d 874 (1963).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
ALR. --Collateral business activities incident to, or in aid of, interstate transportation, as related to interstate commerce, 152 ALR 1078.