Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 33-37-23 | Car Wreck Lawyer

TITLE 33 INSURANCE

Section 37. Insurers Rehabilitation and Liquidation, 33-37-1 through 33-37-58.

ARTICLE 3 PROCEDURE FOR REHABILITATION

33-37-23. Stay of collateral proceedings against insurer; authority of liquidator to intervene in, and defend, out-of-state action.

  1. Upon issuance of an order appointing a liquidator of a domestic insurer or of an alien insurer domiciled in this state, no action at law or equity or in arbitration shall be brought against the insurer or liquidator, whether in this state or elsewhere, nor shall any such existing actions be maintained or further presented after issuance of such order. The courts of this state shall give full faith and credit to injunctions against the liquidator or the company or the continuation of existing actions against the liquidator or the company, when such injunctions are included in an order to liquidate an insurer issued pursuant to corresponding provisions in other states.Whenever, in the liquidator's judgment, protection of the estate of the insurer necessitates intervention in an action against the insurer that is pending outside this state, he may intervene in the action.The liquidator may defend any action in which he intervenes under this Code section at the expense of the estate of the insurer.
  2. The liquidator may, upon or after an order for liquidation, within two years or such other longer time as applicable law may permit, institute an action or proceeding on behalf of the estate of the insurer upon any cause of action against which the period of limitation fixed by applicable law has not expired at the time of the filing of the petition upon which such order is entered.Where, by any agreement, a period of limitation is fixed for instituting a suit or proceeding upon any claim, or for filing any claim, proof of claim, proof of loss, demand, notice, or the like or where in any proceeding, judicial or otherwise, a period of limitation is fixed, either in the proceeding or by applicable law, for taking any action, filing any claim or pleading, or doing any act and where in any such case the period had not expired at the date of the filing of the petition, the liquidator may, for the benefit of the estate, take any such action or do any such act required of or permitted to the insurer within a period of 180 days subsequent to the entry of an order for liquidation or within such further period as is shown to the satisfaction of the court not to be unfairly prejudicial to the other party.
  3. No statute of limitation or defense of laches shall run with respect to any action against an insurer between the filing of a petition for liquidation against an insurer and the denial of the petition.Any action against the insurer that might have been commenced when the petition was filed may be commenced for at least 60 days after the petition is denied.
  4. Any guaranty association or foreign guaranty association shall have standing to appear in any court proceeding concerning the liquidation of an insurer if such association is or may become liable to act as a result of the liquidation.

(Code 1981, §33-37-23, enacted by Ga. L. 1991, p. 1424, § 7.)

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Trial court required to grant stay based on order of New York court.

- Because a New York Order of Rehabilitation enjoined any actions, lawsuits, or proceedings against an insurance company, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 33-37-23(a), the trial court was required to grant a stay as to proceedings against the insurance company in order to give full faith and credit to the injunction ordered by the New York court. Aon Risk Servs. v. Commercial & Military Sys. Co., 270 Ga. App. 510, 607 S.E.2d 157 (2004).

Claims in common with the insolvent trust fund versus personal claims.

- Trial court erred in dismissing the plaintiffs' breach of contract, misrepresentation, and other claims against a workers compensation trust fund because while the court properly concluded that the Georgia Insurance Commissioner, as an appointed receiver, had the exclusive authority to prosecute legal claims that were common to the insolvent trust fund, the court erred in finding that the plaintiffs did not have standing to prosecute claims that were personal in nature and not common to the trust fund. Superior Roofing Co. of Ga., Inc. v. Am. Prof'l Risk Servs., 323 Ga. App. 416, 744 S.E.2d 400 (2013).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 43 Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance, §§ 101, 889.

C.J.S.

- 44 C.J.S., Insurance, § 206 et seq.

API Error: Request was throttled. Expected available in 3 seconds.

No results found for Georgia Code 33-37-23.