A Georgia appeals court has upheld the dismissal of an uninsured motorist claim against Allstate, ruling that policyholders must first secure a judgment against the at-fault uninsured driver before the insurer owes benefits.
The Georgia Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the dismissal on Sept. 16. Under the state’s Uninsured Motorist Act, the court said establishing the uninsured driver’s liability through a judgment is a required condition before an insured can sue the carrier for payment.
The dispute arose from a March 2021 collision in which an uninsured Honda Civic rear-ended a Nissan Maxima occupied by the couple. They sued the Honda driver and her parents for negligence in 2023 and also served Allstate with the complaint, as required under Georgia’s uninsured motorist statute.
That negligence case was dismissed without prejudice in November 2024, leaving no judgment establishing liability. The couple then sent Allstate an uninsured motorist settlement demand in February 2025, supported by medical records. Allstate reviewed the demand and made a counteroffer, but the parties did not reach a settlement.
The couple sued Allstate in May 2025 for breach of contract, bad faith and unfair trade practices, with each claim based on the insurer’s refusal to pay uninsured motorist benefits.
Allstate moved to dismiss, arguing that the couple had failed to satisfy a condition precedent because they had never obtained a judgment against the uninsured driver.
The trial court agreed, and the couple appealed. They conceded that the bad faith claim required a judgment but argued the contract claims should survive, citing a Georgia Supreme Court decision allowing an insured to demand uninsured motorist payment before obtaining a judgment.
The Court of Appeals rejected that reading. It said the earlier case addressed whether a pre-judgment demand could trigger the statutory 60-day period tied to bad faith penalties, not whether an insured could proceed directly against the carrier without first obtaining a judgment against the uninsured motorist.
A demand followed by the insurer’s refusal to pay, the court said, “does not eliminate the requirement that a judgment first be obtained against the uninsured motorist as a condition precedent to suit against the insurer.”
The judges found that the couple’s contract, bad faith and unfair practices claims all depended on Allstate having a duty to pay uninsured motorist benefits. Under OCGA § 33-7-11, that obligation had not arisen because no judgment had been entered against the uninsured driver.
The appellate court therefore left the dismissal in place.
