Mullins v. First General Insurance , 253 Ga. 486 ( 1984 )

Hill, Chief Justice,

concurring specially.

I concur in the majority’s application of the plain meaning of OCGA § 33-34-5 (c), as amended, Ga. L. 1982, pp. 1234, 1236, effective November 1, 1982. However, because I find them unnecessary in interpreting the plain meaning of the amendment, I do not endorse the majority’s statements that the insured did not acquire vested contractual rights on October 19,1982, when the insurance policy became effective, and that the amendment does not impair such rights.

On the other hand, neither do I endorse the premise underlying the dissent, which I read to be that the 1982 amendment impairs the obligation of contracts and hence is unconstitutional. See Const., Art. I, Sec. I, Par. X. That issue is not properly raised in this case which comes to this court from the Court of Appeals.

For the reasons stated, I concur in the majority’s answer to the certified question.