After being injured in an automobile accident, Donna Floyd (sometimes referred to as the insured) received a payment from United Automobile Insurance Company representing the maximum allowable coverage under its policy with the tortfeasor who caused Floyd’s injuries. Floyd later brought suit against American International South Insurance Company, with which she carried an uninsured motorist policy with $25,000 worth of coverage. Floyd maintained that, despite the $25,000 payment from United Automobile, American International was required to cover her remaining damages, including an outstanding hospital lien held by Atlanta Medical Center. Floyd argued that the available limits under the tortfeasor’s liability policy had to be reduced by the amount of the unpaid hospital lien. American International disagreed.
The underlying lawsuit ensued, and based on the provisions of the uninsured motorist statute, the trial court granted summary judgment to American International. Floyd then appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals. In Floyd v. American Intl. South Ins. Co., 298 Ga. App. 771 (681 SE2d 216) (2009), the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, finding that the policy limits available under the tortfeasor’s liability insurance had to be reduced by the amount of the unpaid hospital lien, thereby increasing American International’s exposure. Thereafter, we granted American International’s petition for certiorari to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in extending the rationale of Thurman v. *323State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 278 Ga. 162 (598 SE2d 448) (2004), to the satisfaction of a hospital lien by the tortfeasor’s liability insurer. We reverse.
In our contemporaneously decided case of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Adams, 288 Ga. 315 (702 SE2d 898) (2010), we reviewed the fundamental premise of the uninsured motorist code and the basic nature of hospital liens. Based on that analysis, we determined that such liens imposed pursuant to OCGA § 44-14-470 (b) did not qualify as “payment of other claims or otherwise” under OCGA § 33-7-11 (b) (1) (D) (ii), and, as a result, these liens could not be used to reduce a tortfeasor’s available coverage and increase the coverage of an insured’s uninsured motorist carrier. These findings are directly applicable to the present case. Therefore, for all of the reasons set forth in Adams, supra, we find that Floyd’s unpaid hospital lien does not reduce United Automobile’s coverage or concomitantly increase American International’s uninsured motorist coverage. The Court of Appeals erred in finding otherwise.
Judgment reversed.
All the Justices concur, except Hunstein, C. J., and Benham, J., who dissent.