KEN ROBERTS CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH, INC., AND UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
PAUL J. EGAN, KEVIN GERARD EGAN, AND STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This appeal concerns which insurance policy provides primary versus secondary coverage for claims arising from an automobile accident on December 24, 1975. The trial court determined that Universal Underwriters Insurance Company provided primary coverage and State Farm Mutual provided secondary coverage, but declined to specify the applicable liability limits on the Universal policy.
Universal Underwriters Insurance Company provides primary coverage with limits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence, while State Farm Mutual provides secondary coverage. Paul J. Egan and Kevin Gerard Egan are insureds under Part IV, Section (3)(a) of the Universal policy.
[1] An insurance policy may provide primary coverage for claims arising out of an automobile accident.
[2] An insurance policy may provide secondary coverage for claims arising out of an automobile accident, which is excess over primary coverage.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“provides primary coverage for the claims of David Saleeba and Kathleen Saleeba arising out of the accident of December 24, 1975, as described by the amended complaint filed in this action”
Establishes the trial court's finding regarding which policy was primary coverage
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn automobile accident occurred on December 24, 1975, resulting in personal injury claims by David Saleeba and Kathleen Saleeba. The case involved two…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Limits Of Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
By this appeal and cross-appeal, we are asked to review a final judgment concerning an insurance coverage issue in a personal injury tort action. The final judgment under review finds that the Universal Underwriters Insurance Company policy herein “provides primary coverage for the claims of David Saleeba and Kathleen Sa-leeba arising out of the accident of December 24, 1975, as described by the amended complaint filed in this action” and that the State Farm Mutual Insurance policy herein “provides secondary coverage for said claims, which is excess over that coverage provided by Universal Underwriters Insurance Company.” The trial court declined, upon request, to set the applicable limits of liability as to the Universal policy which was found to provide primary coverage in the subject automobile accident.
We affirm the final judgment under review on the main appeal and cross-appeal except insofar as the trial court declined to set the applicable limits of liability on the Universal Insurance policy. As to the latter, the final judgment under review is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court with directions to amend the final judgment to set the applicable limits of liability as to the above Universal policy in the amount of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence. In our view, Paul J. Egan and Kevin Gerard Egan are insureds under part IV section (3)(a) of the above Universal Insurance policy which provides the above $100,000/$300,000 limits, as primary coverage for the subject accident herein. Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13, 16 (Fla.1976); Ray v. Earl, 277 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973), cert. denied 280 So. 2d 685 (Fla.1973).
Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1976)
- Royal G. RAY & Morrison Assurance Co. v. Earl, 277 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)
- Mueller v. Mueller, 280 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 1973)