IBERIA LOPEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, APPELLEE
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.
Affirmed summary judgment for uninsured motorist carrier where insured settled a claim without consent, violating policy terms and destroying the carrier's subrogation rights under the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act.
An uninsured motorist carrier is not liable when the insured settles a claim without the carrier's consent, thereby destroying the carrier's subrogation rights.
[1] An insured's unauthorized settlement of a claim without the uninsured motorist carrier's consent, which destroys the carrier's subrogation rights under the Uniform Contri…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIberia Lopez settled an automobile accident claim for $3,600 with an alleged joint tortfeasor who had $10,000 liability coverage with Allstate, withou…
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 Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
The plaintiff-appellant settled an automobile accident claim for $3,600 with an alleged joint tortfeasor who had $10,000 of liability coverage with Allstate. This was accomplished without the permission of her uninsured motorist carrier, the appellee Fidelity and Casualty Company, in admitted and unexcused violation of the terms of the UM policy. See Arrieta v. Volkswagen Ins. Co., 343 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Sena v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 305 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); McInnis v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 208 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968).
Since the release given to Allstate and its insured destroyed the subrogated right to contribution arising under the recently enacted Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act, Sec. 768.31(5) Fla.Stat. (1979), which the UM carrier would have secured had it been assessed more than 13,60o1 based on the liability of a phantom vehicle which was also allegedly involved in the accident, prejudice from the breach of the “no-settlement-without-consent” clause was established as a matter of law. See Travelers Ins. Co. v. Gray, 360 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); compare and contrast, Southeastern Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Earnest, 395 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and cases cited. The summary judgment entered below in Fidelity and Casualty’s favor is consequently
Affirmed.
. If the arbitrators awarded the plaintiff less than $3,600, the settlement would have been set off, and Fidelity would have owed her nothing. Dewberry v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 363 So. 2d 1077 (Fla.1978); Volkswagen Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 201 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Am. Fire & Cas. Co. & W. Am. Ins. Co. v. Bradford Sinz, 487 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…ed both a policy provision and section 627.727(6), Florida Statutes (1978), such unauthorized settlement constituted prejudice as a matter of law and therefore voided the coverage, citing in support of that argument Lopez v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 412 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Travelers Insurance Co. v. Gray, 360 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Sena v. State Farm Mutual, 305 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); and McInnis v. State Farm Mutual, 208 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). Of the cited cases, only the L…
-
Argiro v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co., 510 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…A 1986); American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Sinz, 487 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Gould v. Prudential [*636] Property & Casualty Ins. Co., 443 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), rev. denied, 451 So. 2d 848 (Fla.1984); Lopez v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 412 So. 2d 394 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Kaplan v. Phoenix of Hartford Ins. Co., 215 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), cert. denied, 220 So. 2d 365 (Fla.1969). “A mere denial of prejudice is insufficient.” Taplis, 493 So. 2d at 33. Based upon the evidence presented by Ar…
Authorities Cited
- Dewberry v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 363 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 1978)
- Arrieta v. Volkswagen Ins. Co. & Protective Nat'l Ins. Co., 343 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Volkswagen Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 201 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)
- McINNIS v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 208 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- Sena v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 305 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Se. Fid. Ins. Co. v. Earnest, 395 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- The Travelers Ins. Co. v. Marti B. Gray, 360 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)