Travelers Insurance v. Bumstead
This text of 186 S.E. 742 (Travelers Insurance v. Bumstead) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. Where, under section 2(d) of the workmen’s compensation act as amended by the act of -1922 (Ga. L. 1922, p. 185; Code of 1933, § 114-403), an employee flies in the superior court an action at law for damages on account of personal injuries, including claim for decreased earning capacity, medical expenses, and past and future pain and suffering, against the alleged actual tort-feasor, an insurance company which has insured the plaintiff’s employer, and has duly paid the plaintiff compensation for his injuries and his medical expenses, has no legal right to assert its claim for “reimbursement” and “subrogation” under said section of the act, by filing and having-allowed a petition for intervention as a plaintiff in such action at law, which will prevent the employee from dismissing the action without the consent of the insurance company. American Mutual Liability Insurance Co. v. Wigley, 179 Ga. 764 (177 S. E. 568).
2. The rule would not be different if the intervention of the insurance company was allowed without objection, and no exception was taken to the order of allowance, inasmuch as the allowance of the intervention in the first instance was nugatory.
3. The foregoing' answers obviate the necessity of answering other questions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
186 S.E. 742, 182 Ga. 692, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/travelers-insurance-v-bumstead-ga-1936.