From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Khosravi v. Aetna Casualty Surety Company

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Nov 23, 1992
425 S.E.2d 905 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

A92A1292.

DECIDED NOVEMBER 23, 1992.

Action for damages. Fulton State Court. Before Judge Hill.

Johnson Ward, John C. Dabney, Jr., for appellant.

Arrington Hollowell, W. Ray Persons, Victoria W. Wuesthoff, Nations, Yates Freeman, Ronald J. Freeman, for appellee.


Appellee-defendant is appellant-plaintiff's no-fault carrier. Alleging appellee's bad faith, appellant brought suit and sought to recover a penalty, punitive damages and attorney's fees pursuant to former OCGA § 33-34-6. Although an award was made in favor of appellant, she appeals from the judgment entered thereon.

Subsequent to the filing of appellant's instant appeal, former OCGA § 33-34-6 was repealed. "Accordingly, [appellant] was not, when the repealing act was passed, absolutely entitled to an enforcement of [her] judgment, and the case must be dealt with in this court as one which was pending when the repeal took place. This being so, the case in controlled, in principle, by the decision[s] in [ Terry v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 205 Ga. App. 224 ( 422 S.E.2d 212) (1992) and Green v. State Farm Ins. Cos., 206 Ga. App. 478 ( 426 S.E.2d 3) (1992)]." The Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Smith, 96 Ga. 569 ( 23 S.E. 899) (1895). In Terry, supra, we held that where, as here, there is no "contractual term in the policy providing for bad faith damages, there can be no post-repeal recovery of penalties, attorney['s] fees or punitive damages for an insurer['s] bad faith failure to pay under the repealed No-Fault Act. [Cit.] Although the repeal is not retroactive with respect to coverage, it is retroactive with respect to available remedies. [Cit.]" Green v. State Farm Ins. Cos., supra at 481 (2). Since the repeal of former OCGA § 33-34-6 has vitiated appellant's entitlement to any recovery thereunder, it follows that the judgment in the instant case must be affirmed. Appellant is "not entitled to recover at all, and therefore certainly [can] not justly complain of a verdict finding [appellee] liable for but a portion of the amount claimed. . . ." Southern Home Bldg. c. Assn. v. Butler, 111 Ga. 826 (2) ( 35 S.E. 679) (1900).

Judgment affirmed. Pope and Johnson, JJ., concur.

DECIDED NOVEMBER 23, 1992.


Summaries of

Khosravi v. Aetna Casualty Surety Company

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Nov 23, 1992
425 S.E.2d 905 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

Khosravi v. Aetna Casualty Surety Company

Case Details

Full title:KHOSRAVI v. AETNA CASUALTY SURETY COMPANY

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Nov 23, 1992

Citations

425 S.E.2d 905 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992)
425 S.E.2d 905

Citing Cases

Steptoe v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co.

Finally, the Steptoes contend this court's decision in Terry to apply the repeal retroactively is erroneous…

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Sills

Consequently, the trial court's denial of State Farm's motion for partial summary judgment must be reversed.…