Atlanta Insurance Defense Attorneys

Under Southern General Insurance Co. v. Holt, 262 Ga. 267 (1992), an insurer that unreasonably fails to accept a time-limited demand within policy limits can be liable for the full verdict, including the amount above limits. O.C.G.A. § 9-11-67.1 sets content and timing requirements for pre-suit demands in motor vehicle claims, and the General Assembly has amended it repeatedly. We review demands for compliance on the demand's clock, respond, and build a claim file that supports the decision later.

Written coverage analyses, reservation-of-rights letters, and declaratory judgment actions in Georgia courts and the Northern District of Georgia to resolve duty-to-defend and duty-to-indemnify questions before they become bad-faith claims.

Defense of motor carriers, drivers, and their insurers, including FMCSA regulatory issues, preservation of electronic data after a crash, and the negligent hiring, retention, and entrustment claims that follow a serious collision.

SB 68 created a statutory framework for negligent security claims, O.C.G.A. §§ 51-3-50 to -57, including apportionment of fault to the person who committed the crime. It applies to causes of action arising on or after April 21, 2025. Older claims still run under prior case law, so the date of the incident drives the defense.

Auto, premises, and other liability claims against insureds. Georgia apportions fault among parties and nonparties under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33 and bars a plaintiff found 50% or more at fault. Offers of settlement under § 9-11-68 can shift attorney's fees onto a plaintiff who rejects a reasonable offer.

Whether a case belongs in the Northern District of Georgia is often the first strategic call on a new file. Daniel Headrick wrote on removal jurisdiction for the Georgia Bar Journal (February 2025) and has published on defense practice in DRI’s For The Defense.