 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Manzi v. Cotton States Mutual Insurance Co.3/13/2000
whether the insured believes that other insurance is available. To interpret the provision as Manzi suggests would allow an insured to delay notifying the insurer for months or even years, so long as the insured thought that other insurance existed to cover the loss. Such an interpretation is contrary to the obvious intent of the policy, which is to require notice promptly after the occurrence of a covered event.
It is undisputed that Manzi did not notify Cotton States of the occurrence of the accident until November 3, 1997, more than six months after the accident. Unlike in Gregory, compliance with the notice provision is expressly made "a condition precedent to the existence of any coverage under this policy and of the company's obligation to defend any claim under this policy." Although Manzi argues that the notice provision violates public policy because it restricts coverage under the uninsured motorist endorsement, we have previously rejected this argument. And although Manzi contends that Cotton States waived compliance by asserting in its answer that Kistler was adequately insured, we do not see how such an assertion is inconsistent with its defense that Manzi failed to satisfy a condition precedent for coverage, particularly since it raised such a defense in its answer. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in granting Cotton States' motion for summary judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
Andrews, P. J., concurs. Ellington, J., concurs in the judgment only.
Page 1 2 3 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|