Fulton County, Georgia Subrogation Claim Settles for $4,200
One driver allegedly operated a vehicle negligently, causing damage to another vehicle and injuries to its occupants. The insurance company paid for vehicle damages and occupant injuries. The insurance company filed a complaint seeking judgment for the damages paid. The defendants filed numerous defenses. The parties engaged in settlement discussions and mediation. Ultimately, the parties reached a settlement, and a consent judgment was entered.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Settlement
- Amount
- $4,200
- County
- Fulton County, GA
- Resolved
- 2022
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Civil Procedure, Insurance Law, Torts
Settlement Context
This settlement of $4,200 is below the median of $15,000 for other cases resolved by settlement. The typical range is $7,752 to $67,500, based on 126 cases in our database.
Case Overview
On January 12, 2016, a motor vehicle accident occurred in Fulton County, Georgia. The driver, operating a vehicle owned by another individual with alleged permission for a family purpose or in furtherance of employment, was accused of negligent operation. This alleged negligence resulted in damage to another vehicle and injuries to its occupants. The insurer of the damaged vehicle subsequently paid $8,182.64 for vehicle damages and $25,000.00 for an occupant's permanent injuries under the uninsured and underinsured coverage portion of its policy.
On May 11, 2017, the insurer filed a complaint against the driver and vehicle owner, asserting its subrogation rights to recover the payments made, plus interest and costs. The defendants responded on March 8, 2018, by raising numerous defenses, including claims of insufficient service, improper venue, laches, lack of jurisdiction, and challenges to the plaintiff's standing as the real party in interest. Additional defenses included voluntary payment, assumption of risk, contributory or comparative negligence, and failure to mitigate damages.
The case proceeded toward trial, but the parties engaged in settlement discussions and mediation. While the court initially granted summary judgment in favor of the insurer for over $34,000, it later denied both the insurer's motion for summary judgment (finding it untimely) and the defendants' motion to enforce a settlement agreement. Ultimately, the parties reached a new settlement. On February 18, 2020, the court approved a consent order under which the defendants agreed to pay the insurer $4,200 in monthly installments. The agreement stipulated that a default in payments would entitle the insurer to judgment for the full amount plus interest. The case was terminated on May 29, 2020, with a consent judgment entered for the insurer.
Understanding This Case
- This case was resolved through a settlement, avoiding the uncertainty and expense of a trial. Settlements typically resolve faster and provide guaranteed compensation.
- This case was resolved in Fulton County, Georgia. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2022, this case reflects the legal and economic conditions of that period, including medical costs, insurance practices, and jury award trends at the time.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome differs from typical similar cases
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want to check your case value?
Get a free case evaluation to understand what your motor vehicle accident case might be worth based on cases like this in Fulton County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
A motor vehicle collision occurred in Mesa County, Colorado, involving a vehicle operated by the defendant and another car carrying the plaintiff as a passenger. The plaintiff alleged the incident caused permanent personal injuries, pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and resulted in medical expenses and economic losses. The plaintiff filed a vehicular liability action in the Colorado District Court, Twenty-First Judicial District, County of Mesa, claiming the defendant's negligence. Allegations included failing to operate the vehicle prudently, maintain a proper lookout, obey traffic control devices, driving at an excessive speed, and failing to stop at a red light. The plaintiff sought damages for the alleged harm. In response, the defendant denied the allegations of negligence. The defendant also asserted affirmative defenses, including claims of failure to state a claim, culpable conduct, and failure to mitigate damages. The parties subsequently filed a notice with the court indicating that they had reached a settlement in the action.
A plaintiff with a classic automobile insurance policy filed a claim after three vehicles went missing or were stolen from a storage location in Denver, Colorado. The policy required storage in a specific secure building, but the plaintiff had moved the vehicles during renovations. Two vehicles were later recovered severely damaged, while a third remained unlocated. The insurer made a partial payment for one vehicle but denied full coverage, attributing some damage to wear and tear and denying the unrecovered vehicle's claim. The plaintiff sued the insurer in federal court, alleging breach of contract, unreasonable delay and denial of payment under Colorado statutes, and common-law bad faith. The insurer counterclaimed, seeking a declaratory judgment, alleging breach of the policy's misrepresentation and concealment provisions, and requesting recoupment of payments. These counterclaims were permitted to proceed following a magistrate judge's recommendation, which a district judge adopted. The plaintiff later amended the complaint to add the insurance producer as a defendant, alleging negligence if insurer coverage was denied. In July 2023, the plaintiff and the insurer filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice for all claims between them, indicating a settlement had been reached. The specific terms of this settlement were not publicly disclosed. Each party agreed to bear its own costs and attorney fees.
The employer, Star*Tel Systems, appealed a decision by an administrative law judge in Kentucky. The judge had previously determined that an employee sustained a permanent and total disability following a work-related motor vehicle accident. The appeal challenged the judge's opinion, order, and award.
A personal injury case arose from an auto accident. The plaintiff retained an expert in economics to assess damages. The defendant presented experts in emergency medicine, biomechanics, and accident reconstruction, suggesting disputes over the nature or cause of injuries. An occupational therapy expert also participated in the case. The matter proceeded to a trial, which concluded on December 9, 2016. Details regarding the verdict or any award were not specified in the record.
A lawsuit stemmed from a motor vehicle and pedestrian collision. The plaintiff presented expert testimony related to life care planning and rehabilitation, indicating claims for long-term care and disability. The defendant countered with expert testimony from fields including psychology, neuropsychology, and orthopedic surgery. The parties reached a resolution, and the case was concluded with a stipulated dismissal in April 2019.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.