O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 34-9-173 (2019)

Remedy of deficiencies in surplus or reserve; initiation of insolvency proceedings; assessments upon liquidation

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) If the assets of a fund are at any time insufficient to enable a fund to discharge its legal liabilities and other obligations and to maintain the reserves and surplus required of it under this article, it shall forthwith make up the deficiency or levy an assessment upon its members for the amount needed to make up the deficiency.

(b) If the fund fails to make up the deficiency or to make the required assessment of its members within 30 days after the Commissioner orders it to do so or if the deficiency is not fully made up within 60 days after the date on which any such assessment is made or within such longer period of time as may be specified by the Commissioner, the fund shall be deemed to be insolvent and shall be proceeded against in the same manner as are domestic insurers under Chapter 37 of Title 33;

and the Commissioner shall have the same powers and limitations in such proceedings as are provided under that chapter, except as otherwise provided for in this article.

(c) If the liquidation of a fund is ordered, an assessment shall be levied upon its members for such an amount as the Commissioner determines to be necessary to discharge all liabilities of the fund, including the reasonable costs of liquidation.

History

(Code 1933, § 114-620a, enacted by Ga. L. 1980, p. 1686, § 1; Ga. L. 1981, p. 1759, § 1.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS 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. - 44A Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance, § 1828 et seq.

C.J.S. - 44 C.J.S., Insurance, §§ 105, 108.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2013–2013 · leading case: Superior Roofing Co. of Georgia, Inc. v. Am. Prof'l Risk Servs., Inc., 744 S.E.2d 400 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013).
Superior Roofing Co. of Georgia, Inc. v. Am. Prof'l Risk Servs., Inc., 744 S.E.2d 400 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “OCGA § 34-9-173 (b); see also OCGA § 33-37-1 (a).”
Superior Roofing Co. of Georgia, Inc. v. Am. Prof'l Risk Servs., Inc. (Ga. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “” OCGA § 34-9-173 (b); see also OCGA § 33-37-1 (a).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.