State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thomson

3 Citing cases

  1. Essex Insurance Company v. H H Land Devel. Corp.

    525 F. Supp. 2d 1344 (M.D. Ga. 2007)   Cited 12 times
    Finding that storm water runoff and resulting sediment were "pollutants" (i.e. , "irritants or contaminants") in connection with property damage claims

    Id. at 139, 493 S.E.2d 532. The second Georgia case that raises questions about the requirement of intent is State Automobile Insurance Co. v. Thomson, 180 Ga.App. 90, 348 S.E.2d 507 (1986). In Thomson the insured was a landlord who wrongfully evicted a tenant and moved the tenant's furniture out to the street.

  2. Southern Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Saxon

    379 S.E.2d 577 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 15 times
    In Saxon, supra, the issue was the availability of coverage for injuries sustained following a high-speed chase, in which the driver articulated that his intent had been to elude police.

    Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v. Hart, 162 Ga. App. 333, 335 (2) ( 291 S.E.2d 410) (1982), is authority for the proposition that there is a distinction between intentional acts and the intentional consequences or results. See State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thomson, 180 Ga. App. 90 ( 348 S.E.2d 507) (1986). "[A]n exclusion as to injury caused intentionally by the insured does not exclude coverage where there is an intentional act but not an intentionally caused injury."

  3. Pennsylvania Millers Mutual Insurance Com. v. Crews

    361 S.E.2d 657 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987)   Cited 5 times
    In Pennsylvania Millers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Crews, 184 Ga. App. 492 (361 S.E.2d 657) (1987), summary judgment for the parent was upheld in the declaratory judgment action brought by the school board's liability insurer.

    See also Stein v. Mass. Bay Ins. Co., 172 Ga. App. 811 ( 324 S.E.2d 510) (1984). Compare State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thomson, 180 Ga. App. 90 ( 348 S.E.2d 507) (1986). I would reverse the judgment of the trial court and, therefore, I dissent.