[PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
________________________
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-15448 April 1, 2004
Non-Argument Calendar THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________ CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 98-02373-CV-ODE
CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BARBARA F. ADAMO,
individually and in her capacity as Administrator
of the Estate of SHANA SLAKMAN,
SHERWIN GLASS,
Defendants-Appellees,
BARRY S. SLAKMAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
_________________________
(April 1, 2004)
Before ANDERSON, BLACK and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Barry S. Slakman appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment
in favor of Barbara F. Adamo, Sherwin Glass, and Continental Casualty Co. in
Continental’s interpleader action. We issued an opinion in the case on April 2,
2003, in which we certified the following question to the Georgia Supreme Court:
“WHETHER SECTION 33-25-13 OF THE CODE OF GEORGIA BARS AN
INDIVIDUAL FROM RECEIVING BENEFITS UNDER A MURDER VICTIM’S
LIFE INSURANCE POLICY BEFORE HIS CONVICTION AND SENTENCE
BECOME ‘FINAL’ UNDER STATE LAW.” See Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Adamo,
326
F.3d 1181, 1183 (11th Cir. 2003) (per curiam).
The Georgia Supreme Court then answered the question in the negative.
They held that a reading of OGCA § 33-25-13 that ensures that a conviction for
murder or voluntary manslaughter may serve as prima facie evidence of guilt in a
§ 33-25-13 civil proceeding upon exhaustion of the right to appeal or the
expiration of time within which a first direct appeal could be filed, furthers the
public policy upon which OGCA § 33-25-13 is based. See Slakman v. Cont’l Cas.
Co.,
587 S.E.2d 24, 27 (Ga. 2003). In addition, they held, such a reading “affords
an individual the opportunity to challenge a criminal conviction through direct
2
appeal before imperiling his rights to any insurance benefits.”
Id. In light of that
holding, we reverse the district court’s order finding that Slakman forfeited all
rights under the insurance policy at issue, and remand for proceedings not
inconsistent with this opinion.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
3
