Fountain v. Atlanta Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting contention that the exclusion of uninsured motorist coverage for named driver violated public policy
• Georgia Supreme Court expressly refused to consider the merits of this issue in Fountain v. Atlanta Cos., 262 Ga. 16, 413 S.E.2d 450 (1992)
• named driver exclusion provided that named insured “hereby consents and agrees to the exclusion set forth above and also rejects in writing all uninsured motorist coverage”
• named driver exclusion provided that named insured “hereby consents and agrees to the exclusion set forth above and also rejects in writing all uninsured motorist coverage”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).