O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 36-85-4 (2019)

Agency not an insurer

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
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

An interlocal risk management agency created pursuant to this chapter is not an insurance company or an insurer under Title 33, and the development and administration by such agency of one or more group self-insurance funds shall not constitute doing business as an insurer.

History

Code 1981, § 36-85-4, enacted by Ga. L. 1986, p. 1496, § 1.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Coverage agreement with Georgia Interlocal Risk Management Agency excluded uninsured and underinsured motorist protection. - Court of appeals correctly determined that no statute required that a city’s agreement with the Georgia Interlocal Risk Management Agency (GIRMA) had to meet the uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage requirements that an insurance policy issued by an insurer had to meet pursuant

to O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11 because the General Assembly explicitly declared that GIRMA was not an insurer; the city’s agreement with GIRMA was limited to its express terms and did not include underinsured motorist protection. Godfrey v. Ga. Interlocal Risk Mgmt. Agency, 290 Ga. 211, 719 S.E.2d 412 (2011). Cited in Adams v. Perdue, 199 Ga. App. 476, 405 S.E.2d 305 (1991).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1991–2016 · leading case: Godfrey v. Georgia Interlocal Risk Mgmt. Agency, 719 S.E.2d 412 (Ga. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Godfrey v. Georgia Interlocal Risk Mgmt. Agency, 719 S.E.2d 412 (Ga. 2011). · cites it 6× “OCGA § 36-85-4 reads: An interlocal risk management agency created pursuant to this chapter is not an insurance company or an insurer under Title 33, and the development and administration by such agency of one or more group self-insurance funds shall not constitute doing…”
Georgia Interlocal Risk Mgmt. Agency v. City of Sandy Springs, 788 S.E.2d 74 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “The coverage agreement (the “Contract”) obtained by the City provided coverage for Errors and Omissions — and specifically coverage for money damages incurred by a Member arising from any Wrongful Act committed during the coverage period (which includes alleged constitutional…”
Georgia Interlocal Risk Mgmt. Agency v. Godfrey, 614 S.E.2d 201 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “See OCGA § 36-85-4. See OCGA § 36-85-2 (a). See CSX Transp.”
Sinkfield v. Pike, 411 S.E.2d 889 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “See OCGA §§ 36-85-4; 36-85-20. As appellees note, GIRMA is an association formed to pool certain liability and property damage risks, not to provide indemnity insurance.”
Adams v. Perdue, 405 S.E.2d 305 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 36-85-4 provides that “[a]n interlocal risk management agency created pursuant to this chapter is not an insurance company or an insurer under Title 33, and the development and administration by such agency of one or more group self-insurance funds shall not constitute…”
CSX Transp., Inc. v. City of Garden City, Georgia, 196 F. Supp. 2d 1288 (S.D. Ga. 2002). · cites it 2× “See O.C.G.A. § 36-85-4 ("An interlocal risk management agency created pursuant to this chapter is not an insurance company or an insurer under Title 33, and the development and administration by such agency of one or more group self-insurance funds shall not constitute doing…”
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.