Professional Negligence Law Reporter

The Supreme Court of Georgia held that the accrual date for a plaintiff’s legal negligence claim was the last day her attorney could protect her UM claim by lawfully effecting service on her UM carrier.

Here, JoEtta Armstrong was injured in a motorcycle crash that killed her husband. She retained attorney Thomas Cuffie to handle her claims against the other drivers. Several months later, in January 2010, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. sent Cuffie a letter regarding UM coverage under Armstrong’s policy; however, Cuffie neither followed up on the letter nor presented a UM claim to State Farm. Approximately two months later, Cuffie filed Armstrong’s wrongful death suit against one of the drivers and others involved in the incident, as well as their respective insurance companies and employers.

In July 2017, after settling her claims, Armstrong sued the Cuffie Firm, alleging legal negligence, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty arising from the failure to seek UM coverage. The defendant moved to dismiss, arguing that the lawsuit was barred by the applicable limitations statute. The defendant asserted that the limitations period for the plaintiff’s claim began in 2011 when it could no longer seek UM coverage. The plaintiff responded that the limitations period for her claims did not begin to run until fall of 2013, two years after one driver’s criminal trial. The trial court denied the motion and concluded that the plaintiff’s claims had been timely filed. An intermediate appellate court reversed, holding that the plaintiff’s claims were time-barred. The appellate court concluded that the plaintiff’s malpractice claim accrued in 2010, when Cuffie learned of the potential claim for UM coverage against State Farm.

Reversing, the state high court noted that in Georgia, a UM carrier must be timely served as though the insurer were actually named as a party defendant. It does not constitute malpractice for an attorney to fail to serve a UM carrier before the lawful period for service in a case has run, the court said. Thus, the court concluded that the plaintiff could not have brought an action against the defendant for failing to bring her UM claim until the time for service on all the named defendants in her tort action had expired. Here, the court found, state law tolled the two-year limitations period on Armstrong’s tort action until the criminal trial of one of the drivers ended in November 2011. As such, the defendant was not subject to a malpractice claim for failing to serve State Farm until November 2013, the court said, and the four-year limitations period for the plaintiff’s malpractice lawsuit did not begin to run until that time. The plaintiff’s malpractice suit, filed in July 2017, was therefore timely, the court concluded.

Citation: Armstrong v. Cuffie, 2021 WL 2518630 (Ga. June 21, 2021).

Plaintiff counsel: Timothy J. Gardner and Henrietta Gaveral Brown, both of Atlanta.