Preview
IN THE STATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
BYRON PERKINS
Plaintiff,
vs.
OTD LOGISTICS INCORPORATED, CIVIL ACTION
SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE FILE NO: 22A00477
GROUP, INC., formerly HOUSTON
SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
TERENCE GADSON, JOHN DOE 1, JOHN
DOE 2, AND JOHN DOE 3,
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO ADD A PARTY AND RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE GROUP, INC.’S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER DENYING
SKYWARD’S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE PARTIES
COMES NOW BYRON PERKINS, Plaintiff in the above styled action, by and through
counsel, and files his Motion to Add a Party and Response in Opposition to Defendant Skyward
Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Trial Court’s Order
Denying Skyward’s Motion to Substitute Parties and shows the Court as follows:
I. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
On Wednesday, March 25, 2020, at about 9:28 a.m., Defendant Terence Gadson caused a
collision resulting in Byron Perkins sustaining painful injuries. Plaintiff Byron Perkins, operating
a 1998 Ford F150, was traveling I-20 eastbound, in Lithonia, DeKalb County, Georgia near the
Lithonia Industrial Blvd. exit ramp. Plaintiff Perkins occupied the far-left lane of travel.
Defendant Terence Gadson, operating a 2017 Freightliner LJR tractor trailer, was also
traveling eastbound on I-20, in Lithonia, DeKalb County, Georgia. Defendant Gadson’s tractor
STATE COURT OF
DEKALB COUNTY, GA.
8/7/2023 5:27 PM
E-FILED
BY: Mundy B Jackson
and trailer occupied the far-right lane of travel. Defendant Gadson was operating a vehicle
owned by Defendant OTD Logistics.
Gabriel Oladapo, operating a 2019 Freightliner CMV, was traveling I-20 eastbound, in
Lithonia, DeKalb County, Georgia, close to the Lithonia Industrial Blvd. exit ramp. Mr. Oladapo
occupied the middle lane of travel.
Suddenly and without warning, Defendant Gadson traveled into Mr. Oladapo’s lane of
travel and collided with Mr. Oladapo’s vehicle. The collision caused Mr. Oladapo’s vehicle to
travel into Plaintiff’s lane of travel, causing Mr. Perkins to strike the median wall and sustain
severe injuries.
II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On February 4, 2022, Byron Perkins filed his complaint against Defendants alleging
injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on March 25, 2020. On March 11,
2022, Defendant Skyward answered the Plaintiff’s Complaint. Plaintiff served discovery requests
upon Defendant Skyward on April 20, 2022. Defendant Skyward responded to Plaintiff’s
discovery requests on June 10, 2022.
On January 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty
Insurance Group, Inc. pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-30(b)(6), seeking to depose the company’s
corporate representative. On February 7, 2023, Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group,
Inc. filed a Notice of Substitution of Counsel, receiving counsel to focus individually on their
case. On February 7, 2023, Plaintiff withdrew its Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty, in
agreement to allow new counsel to become acquainted with the case.
On April 28, 2023, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Notice of Deposition of Skyward
Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. On May 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Notice of
Deposition of Skyward Specialty. On May 19, 2023, Defendants filed their Motion to Quash
Plaintiff’s Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. pursuant to
O.C.G.A. § 9-11-30(b)(6) and Incorporated Motion for Protective Order. On May 19, 2023,
Defendant Skyward also filed its Motion to Substitute Parties. On June 19, 2023, Plaintiff filed
his Response in Opposition to Defendant Skyward's Motion to Substitute Parties. On June 29,
2023, the Honorable Judge Johnny Panos executed an Order Denying Defendant Skyward
Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.’s Motion to Quash and Protective Order. Also, on June 29, 2023,
the Honorable Judge Johnny Panos executed an additional Order Denying Defendant Skyward
Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.’s Motion to Substitute Parties. On July 6, 2023, Defendant
Skyward filed its Motion for Reconsideration on its Motion to Substitute Parties.
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
In order to add or drop parties, the trial court must exercise its discretion in determining
the change of status of parties. Rogers v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 343 Ga. App. 655, 655,
808 S.E.2d 233, 234, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 548, *1, 2017 WL 4900560. The determination of
whether a party should be added to a lawsuit lies within the discretion of the trial court, and that
determination will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse.
Barrs v. Acree, 302 Ga. App. 521, 521, 691 S.E.2d 575, 577, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 170, *1,
2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 585.
IV. ARGUMENT & CITATION OF AUTHORITY
Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-21 Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. has
moved the Court to substitute in its place Houston Specialty Insurance Company. Defendant
Skyward asserts that Plaintiff misnamed and mis-joined Skyward as a party defendant.
Defendant Skyward also argues that Houston Specialty Insurance Company, and not Skyward,
issued the insurance policy that provides coverage to Defendants OTD and Gadson and thus, is
the proper party to this action.
O.C.G.A. § 9-11-21 states:
9-11-21. Misjoinder and nonjoinder of parties.
Misjoinder of parties is not ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added
by order of the court on motion of any party or of its own initiative at any stage of the action and
on such terms as are just. Any claim against a party may be severed and proceeded with
separately.
O.C.G.A 9-11- 21 allows parties to be dropped or added by order of the court. Failure to
name the proper parties is an amendable defect, correctable by the parties or upon the court’s
own motion. Hanson v. Wilson, 257 Ga. 5, 354 S.E.2d 126, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 699 (1987).
Before litigation began, Plaintiff conducted significant research on the identity of
Defendant Gadson’s and Defendant OTD’s insurer. Based upon research the Plaintiff found that
Houston Specialty Insurance Company was not an existing corporate entity and appeared to have
changed its name to Skyward Specialty. As such, Plaintiff named Defendant Skyward as the
insurer in this action. Defendant Skyward now asserts that Skyward is the parent company of
Houston Specialty and is not a proper party to the action.
Defendant Skyward acknowledges that Houston Specialty is a defunct corporation under
Delaware law. Defendant Skyward now directs the Court to Texas law regarding the formation
of insurance companies to deflect from the fact that Houston Specialty Insurance Company is the
alter ego of Defendant Skyward.
A. Houston Specialty Insurance Company is the alter ego of Skyward Specialty
Insurance Group, Inc.
Defendant Skyward states that it is not the entity that issued the policy to Defendant OTD
Logistics. As proof it directs the Court to the declarations page of its policy. However, the
beginning six pages of the policy at issue, is a notice of privacy rights to the insured from
Defendant Skyward. See Exhibit A. (Defendant Skyward is formerly known as Houston
International Insurance Group, LTD). According to the document, which appears at the
beginning of the policy documents, if insureds wish to access and correct their personal
information, the insureds are directed to Defendant Skyward. Specifically, insureds are directed
to send their written request to Defendant Skyward as follows:
Houston International Insurance Group, LTD. (Now Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.)
Attn: Compliance Department
800 Gessner, Suite 600
Houston, TX 77024
Not only is Defendant Skyward identified in the insurance policy documents, it is also
responsible for handling the insureds’ sensitive information.
B. The Insurance Policy is Signed by Defendant Skyward Employees.
The authorized representative that signed the declarations page of the subject policy is
Kirby Hill. See Exhibit B. Mr. Hill is listed on Skyward’s website as President of Specialty
Programs and Industry Solutions. See Exhibit D. The witnesses to the insurance policy are Peter
B. Smith and Leslie K. Shaunty. Mr. Smith appears to be a former employee of Defendant
Skyward and Ms. Shaunty is legal counsel for Defendant Skyward. See Exhibits C & D.
Defendant Skyward and Houston Specialty are essentially the same company, and its business is
conducted in such a manner that Houston Specialty is merely the alter ego of Skyward.
C. There is no distinction between Skyward Specialty and Houston Specialty Insurance
Company.
Defendant Skyward and Houston Specialty Insurance Company share the same website
at skywardinsurance.com. Defendant Skyward and Houston Specialty share the same mailing
address and office address at 800 Gesner Road, Suite 600, Houston, Texas 77024. Defendant
Skyward accepts and responds to inquiries for policies written by “Houston Specialty”.
Further, Defendant Skyward employees sign and witness the insurance policies issued by
“Houston Specialty.”
Defendant Skyward has also responded to discovery with information that would only
be within the knowledge of a party with access to the insurance file and claims documents.
See Defendant Skyward’s initial responses to Plaintiffs First Interrogatories, where Skyward
provided information regarding property damage claims that were paid to vehicle owners
involved in the collision. Exhibit E. Defendant Skyward also provided the insurance policy
in response to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. See
Exhibit F.
D. The Court should exercise its discretion and add Houston Specialty Insurance
Company to the action.
In order to add or drop parties, the trial court must exercise its discretion in determining
the change of status of parties. Rogers v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 343 Ga. App. 655, 655,
808 S.E.2d 233, 234, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 548, *1, 2017 WL 4900560. The determination of
whether a party should be added to a lawsuit lies within the discretion of the trial court, and that
determination will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse.
Barrs v. Acree, 302 Ga. App. 521, 521, 691 S.E.2d 575, 577, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 170, *1,
2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 585.
Georgia's direct-action statutes create standing for injured plaintiffs to sue insurers of motor
carriers directly. Stillwell v. Topa Ins. Co., 363 Ga. App. 126, 126, 871 S.E.2d 8, 9, 2022 Ga.
App. LEXIS 130, *1 Defendant Skyward acknowledges that the direct-action statute allows a
Plaintiff to sue the insurer, but contends it is not the insurer. Defendant Skyward has not
provided sufficient information to warrant that it be released from this action but has made a
sufficient argument that Houston Specialty be added as a party.
Defendant Skyward requests that this Court substitute Houston Specialty Insurance
Company in its place. However, Houston Specialty, as a party will have the authority to
assert defenses that may not align with representations made by Defendant Skyward.
Therefore, Plaintiff requests that Defendant Skyward’s Motion be denied as requested.
Plaintiffs, however, now request that Houston Specialty Insurance Company be added as a
party, and that Defendant Skyward remain a defendant in this action. A determination can
then be made, by means of discovery, as to if, one or both, of the insurers is the proper
defendant, where both Skyward Specialty and Houston Specialty Insurance Company are
identified in the documents that comprise the subject insurance policy and where Houston
Specialty Insurance Company and Skyward Specialty appear to be the same entity.
WHEREFORE based upon the foregoing the Plaintiff respectfully requests that
Defendant Skyward’s Motion for Reconsideration regarding substitution be DENIED as
requested and Houston Specialty Insurance Company be added as a Defendant to this action.
Respectfully submitted, this 7th day of August 2023.
MINNIFIELD LAW GROUP, LLC
/s/ Kimelyn A. Minnifield
Kimelyn A. Minnifield
Georgia Bar No. 002585
Attorney for Plaintiff
1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
McDonough, Georgia 30253
470-317-9599 Phone
470-200-1111 Facsimile
kminnifield@minnifieldlawgroup.com
STATE COURT OF
DEKALB COUNTY, GA.
8/7/2023 5:27 PM
E-FILED
BY: Mundy Jackson
IN THE STATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
BYRON PERKINS
Plaintiff,
vs.
Civil Action
OTD LOGISTICS INCORPORATED, File No: 22A00477
SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD., formerly HOUSTON
SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
TERENCE GADSON, JOHN DOE 1, JOHN
DOE 2, AND JOHN DOE 3,
Defendants.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have this date served the within and foregoing PLAINTIFF'S
MOTION TO ADD A PARTY AND RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT
SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER DENYING SKYWARD’S
MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE PARTIES upon all parties by Statutory Electronic Service or by
depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail in a properly addressed envelope with
adequate postage thereon to ensure delivery to:
Christy M. Maple, Esq.
Robert D. Whitney, Esq.
GlenLake Four
4141 ParkLake Avenue, Suite 530
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612-3723
Attorneys for Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.
a/k/a Houston Specialty Insurance Company
CRUSER, MITCHELL, NOVITZ,
SANCHEZ, GASTON & ZIMET, LLP
Gregory Maddaleni, Esq.
Jason G. Wyrick, Esq.
Meridian II, Suite 2000
275 Scientific Drive
Peachtree Corners, GA 30092
Attorneys for Defendants OTD Logistics
Incorporated, and Terence Gadson
Anita R. Kant, Esq.
P. O. Box 77055
Madison, WI 53707
Attorney for American Family Insurance
Respectfully submitted, this 7th day of August 2023.
MINNIFIELD LAW GROUP, LLC
/s/ Kimelyn A. Minnifield
Kimelyn A. Minnifield
Georgia Bar No. 002585
Attorney for Plaintiffs
1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
McDonough, Georgia 30253
470-317-9599 Phone
470-200-1111 Facsimile
kminnifield@minnifieldlawgroup.com
Preview
IN THE STATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA BYRON PERKINS Plaintiff, vs. OTD LOGISTICS INCORPORATED, CIVIL ACTION SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE FILE NO: 22A00477 GROUP, INC., formerly HOUSTON SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, TERENCE GADSON, JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, AND JOHN DOE 3, Defendants. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO ADD A PARTY AND RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER DENYING SKYWARD’S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE PARTIES COMES NOW BYRON PERKINS, Plaintiff in the above styled action, by and through counsel, and files his Motion to Add a Party and Response in Opposition to Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Trial Court’s Order Denying Skyward’s Motion to Substitute Parties and shows the Court as follows: I. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS On Wednesday, March 25, 2020, at about 9:28 a.m., Defendant Terence Gadson caused a collision resulting in Byron Perkins sustaining painful injuries. Plaintiff Byron Perkins, operating a 1998 Ford F150, was traveling I-20 eastbound, in Lithonia, DeKalb County, Georgia near the Lithonia Industrial Blvd. exit ramp. Plaintiff Perkins occupied the far-left lane of travel. Defendant Terence Gadson, operating a 2017 Freightliner LJR tractor trailer, was also traveling eastbound on I-20, in Lithonia, DeKalb County, Georgia. Defendant Gadson’s tractor STATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY, GA. 8/7/2023 5:27 PM E-FILED BY: Mundy B Jackson and trailer occupied the far-right lane of travel. Defendant Gadson was operating a vehicle owned by Defendant OTD Logistics. Gabriel Oladapo, operating a 2019 Freightliner CMV, was traveling I-20 eastbound, in Lithonia, DeKalb County, Georgia, close to the Lithonia Industrial Blvd. exit ramp. Mr. Oladapo occupied the middle lane of travel. Suddenly and without warning, Defendant Gadson traveled into Mr. Oladapo’s lane of travel and collided with Mr. Oladapo’s vehicle. The collision caused Mr. Oladapo’s vehicle to travel into Plaintiff’s lane of travel, causing Mr. Perkins to strike the median wall and sustain severe injuries. II. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On February 4, 2022, Byron Perkins filed his complaint against Defendants alleging injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on March 25, 2020. On March 11, 2022, Defendant Skyward answered the Plaintiff’s Complaint. Plaintiff served discovery requests upon Defendant Skyward on April 20, 2022. Defendant Skyward responded to Plaintiff’s discovery requests on June 10, 2022. On January 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-30(b)(6), seeking to depose the company’s corporate representative. On February 7, 2023, Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. filed a Notice of Substitution of Counsel, receiving counsel to focus individually on their case. On February 7, 2023, Plaintiff withdrew its Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty, in agreement to allow new counsel to become acquainted with the case. On April 28, 2023, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. On May 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty. On May 19, 2023, Defendants filed their Motion to Quash Plaintiff’s Notice of Deposition of Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-30(b)(6) and Incorporated Motion for Protective Order. On May 19, 2023, Defendant Skyward also filed its Motion to Substitute Parties. On June 19, 2023, Plaintiff filed his Response in Opposition to Defendant Skyward's Motion to Substitute Parties. On June 29, 2023, the Honorable Judge Johnny Panos executed an Order Denying Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.’s Motion to Quash and Protective Order. Also, on June 29, 2023, the Honorable Judge Johnny Panos executed an additional Order Denying Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.’s Motion to Substitute Parties. On July 6, 2023, Defendant Skyward filed its Motion for Reconsideration on its Motion to Substitute Parties. III. STANDARD OF REVIEW In order to add or drop parties, the trial court must exercise its discretion in determining the change of status of parties. Rogers v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 343 Ga. App. 655, 655, 808 S.E.2d 233, 234, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 548, *1, 2017 WL 4900560. The determination of whether a party should be added to a lawsuit lies within the discretion of the trial court, and that determination will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse. Barrs v. Acree, 302 Ga. App. 521, 521, 691 S.E.2d 575, 577, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 170, *1, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 585. IV. ARGUMENT & CITATION OF AUTHORITY Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-21 Defendant Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. has moved the Court to substitute in its place Houston Specialty Insurance Company. Defendant Skyward asserts that Plaintiff misnamed and mis-joined Skyward as a party defendant. Defendant Skyward also argues that Houston Specialty Insurance Company, and not Skyward, issued the insurance policy that provides coverage to Defendants OTD and Gadson and thus, is the proper party to this action. O.C.G.A. § 9-11-21 states: 9-11-21. Misjoinder and nonjoinder of parties. Misjoinder of parties is not ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or of its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a party may be severed and proceeded with separately. O.C.G.A 9-11- 21 allows parties to be dropped or added by order of the court. Failure to name the proper parties is an amendable defect, correctable by the parties or upon the court’s own motion. Hanson v. Wilson, 257 Ga. 5, 354 S.E.2d 126, 1987 Ga. LEXIS 699 (1987). Before litigation began, Plaintiff conducted significant research on the identity of Defendant Gadson’s and Defendant OTD’s insurer. Based upon research the Plaintiff found that Houston Specialty Insurance Company was not an existing corporate entity and appeared to have changed its name to Skyward Specialty. As such, Plaintiff named Defendant Skyward as the insurer in this action. Defendant Skyward now asserts that Skyward is the parent company of Houston Specialty and is not a proper party to the action. Defendant Skyward acknowledges that Houston Specialty is a defunct corporation under Delaware law. Defendant Skyward now directs the Court to Texas law regarding the formation of insurance companies to deflect from the fact that Houston Specialty Insurance Company is the alter ego of Defendant Skyward. A. Houston Specialty Insurance Company is the alter ego of Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. Defendant Skyward states that it is not the entity that issued the policy to Defendant OTD Logistics. As proof it directs the Court to the declarations page of its policy. However, the beginning six pages of the policy at issue, is a notice of privacy rights to the insured from Defendant Skyward. See Exhibit A. (Defendant Skyward is formerly known as Houston International Insurance Group, LTD). According to the document, which appears at the beginning of the policy documents, if insureds wish to access and correct their personal information, the insureds are directed to Defendant Skyward. Specifically, insureds are directed to send their written request to Defendant Skyward as follows: Houston International Insurance Group, LTD. (Now Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc.) Attn: Compliance Department 800 Gessner, Suite 600 Houston, TX 77024 Not only is Defendant Skyward identified in the insurance policy documents, it is also responsible for handling the insureds’ sensitive information. B. The Insurance Policy is Signed by Defendant Skyward Employees. The authorized representative that signed the declarations page of the subject policy is Kirby Hill. See Exhibit B. Mr. Hill is listed on Skyward’s website as President of Specialty Programs and Industry Solutions. See Exhibit D. The witnesses to the insurance policy are Peter B. Smith and Leslie K. Shaunty. Mr. Smith appears to be a former employee of Defendant Skyward and Ms. Shaunty is legal counsel for Defendant Skyward. See Exhibits C & D. Defendant Skyward and Houston Specialty are essentially the same company, and its business is conducted in such a manner that Houston Specialty is merely the alter ego of Skyward. C. There is no distinction between Skyward Specialty and Houston Specialty Insurance Company. Defendant Skyward and Houston Specialty Insurance Company share the same website at skywardinsurance.com. Defendant Skyward and Houston Specialty share the same mailing address and office address at 800 Gesner Road, Suite 600, Houston, Texas 77024. Defendant Skyward accepts and responds to inquiries for policies written by “Houston Specialty”. Further, Defendant Skyward employees sign and witness the insurance policies issued by “Houston Specialty.” Defendant Skyward has also responded to discovery with information that would only be within the knowledge of a party with access to the insurance file and claims documents. See Defendant Skyward’s initial responses to Plaintiffs First Interrogatories, where Skyward provided information regarding property damage claims that were paid to vehicle owners involved in the collision. Exhibit E. Defendant Skyward also provided the insurance policy in response to Plaintiffs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. See Exhibit F. D. The Court should exercise its discretion and add Houston Specialty Insurance Company to the action. In order to add or drop parties, the trial court must exercise its discretion in determining the change of status of parties. Rogers v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 343 Ga. App. 655, 655, 808 S.E.2d 233, 234, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 548, *1, 2017 WL 4900560. The determination of whether a party should be added to a lawsuit lies within the discretion of the trial court, and that determination will not be disturbed on appeal absent a showing of abuse. Barrs v. Acree, 302 Ga. App. 521, 521, 691 S.E.2d 575, 577, 2010 Ga. App. LEXIS 170, *1, 2010 Fulton County D. Rep. 585. Georgia's direct-action statutes create standing for injured plaintiffs to sue insurers of motor carriers directly. Stillwell v. Topa Ins. Co., 363 Ga. App. 126, 126, 871 S.E.2d 8, 9, 2022 Ga. App. LEXIS 130, *1 Defendant Skyward acknowledges that the direct-action statute allows a Plaintiff to sue the insurer, but contends it is not the insurer. Defendant Skyward has not provided sufficient information to warrant that it be released from this action but has made a sufficient argument that Houston Specialty be added as a party. Defendant Skyward requests that this Court substitute Houston Specialty Insurance Company in its place. However, Houston Specialty, as a party will have the authority to assert defenses that may not align with representations made by Defendant Skyward. Therefore, Plaintiff requests that Defendant Skyward’s Motion be denied as requested. Plaintiffs, however, now request that Houston Specialty Insurance Company be added as a party, and that Defendant Skyward remain a defendant in this action. A determination can then be made, by means of discovery, as to if, one or both, of the insurers is the proper defendant, where both Skyward Specialty and Houston Specialty Insurance Company are identified in the documents that comprise the subject insurance policy and where Houston Specialty Insurance Company and Skyward Specialty appear to be the same entity. WHEREFORE based upon the foregoing the Plaintiff respectfully requests that Defendant Skyward’s Motion for Reconsideration regarding substitution be DENIED as requested and Houston Specialty Insurance Company be added as a Defendant to this action. Respectfully submitted, this 7th day of August 2023. MINNIFIELD LAW GROUP, LLC /s/ Kimelyn A. Minnifield Kimelyn A. Minnifield Georgia Bar No. 002585 Attorney for Plaintiff 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. McDonough, Georgia 30253 470-317-9599 Phone 470-200-1111 Facsimile kminnifield@minnifieldlawgroup.com STATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY, GA. 8/7/2023 5:27 PM E-FILED BY: Mundy Jackson IN THE STATE COURT OF DEKALB COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA BYRON PERKINS Plaintiff, vs. Civil Action OTD LOGISTICS INCORPORATED, File No: 22A00477 SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., formerly HOUSTON SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, TERENCE GADSON, JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, AND JOHN DOE 3, Defendants. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that I have this date served the within and foregoing PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ADD A PARTY AND RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT SKYWARD SPECIALTY INSURANCE GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER DENYING SKYWARD’S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE PARTIES upon all parties by Statutory Electronic Service or by depositing a copy of same in the United States Mail in a properly addressed envelope with adequate postage thereon to ensure delivery to: Christy M. Maple, Esq. Robert D. Whitney, Esq. GlenLake Four 4141 ParkLake Avenue, Suite 530 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612-3723 Attorneys for Skyward Specialty Insurance Group, Inc. a/k/a Houston Specialty Insurance Company CRUSER, MITCHELL, NOVITZ, SANCHEZ, GASTON & ZIMET, LLP Gregory Maddaleni, Esq. Jason G. Wyrick, Esq. Meridian II, Suite 2000 275 Scientific Drive Peachtree Corners, GA 30092 Attorneys for Defendants OTD Logistics Incorporated, and Terence Gadson Anita R. Kant, Esq. P. O. Box 77055 Madison, WI 53707 Attorney for American Family Insurance Respectfully submitted, this 7th day of August 2023. MINNIFIELD LAW GROUP, LLC /s/ Kimelyn A. Minnifield Kimelyn A. Minnifield Georgia Bar No. 002585 Attorney for Plaintiffs 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. McDonough, Georgia 30253 470-317-9599 Phone 470-200-1111 Facsimile kminnifield@minnifieldlawgroup.com