MORGAN PEARCY AND PANCO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, 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.
A corporation's uninsured motorist policy cannot extend coverage to the employee-son of a corporate officer through a family-member clause, because a corporation has no family relatives, and listing an employee as an operator does not make that employee a named insured.
A family-member clause in a corporate uninsured motorist policy is void as applied to a corporation, and listing an employee as an operator of the corporation's vehicle does not make that employee a named insured under the policy.
[1] A family-member clause in an uninsured motorist policy issued to a corporation is void because a corporation cannot have relatives by blood, marriage, or adoption.
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 intelligenceAn employee and son of a corporate vice-president was fatally injured in an automobile collision while operating an uninsured vehicle owned by a frien…
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 Insured Status cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
This appeal is brought by the insured corporation and its vice-president, the father of an employee fatally injured in an automobile collision, from an order dismissing a complaint by which appellants sought to obtain benefits under the corporation’s uninsured motorist policy.
We hold that where an uninsured motorist policy issued to a corporation, in standard form language, includes as an insured any “family member, related to [named insured] by blood, marriage or adoption who is a resident in [named insured’s] household,” the language is a nullity, as the corporation can have no such relative. Neither does the listing of an employee as an operator of the corporation’s vehicle, on a policy of insurance issued to the corporation, make that employee a named insured. See Whitten v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co., 410 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1982); U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Williams, 375 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), cert. denied, 386 So. 2d 642 (Fla.1980).
Thus, where employee, son of the corporate officer, was injured while operating a noncovered, uninsured automobile owned by a friend, on a social outing, although he was a named operator of the corporation’s vehicles on an uninsured motorist policy issued to the corporation, there was no coverage.
The order dismissing the second amended complaint for failure to state a cause of action is AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Williams v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc., 549 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…d have no family members to whom uninsured motorist coverage is extended by the normal uninsured motorist provisions in common use in this state. Travelers Insurance Co. v. Bartoszewicz, 404 So. 2d 1053 (Fla.1981); Pearcy v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 429 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 438 So. 2d 833 (Fla. [*254] 1983). Here, Iowa’s uninsured motorist endorsement extends coverage to “you or any family member.” But, “you” is defined as “the person or organization shown as the ‘named insured’.” To bridge…
-
Am. Fire & Cas. Co. & W. Am. Ins. Co. v. Bradford Sinz, 487 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
-
Olin v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am., 532 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Pearcy v. Travelers Indem. Co., 429 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 438 So. 2d 833 (Fla.1983).…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Whitten v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 410 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1982)
- United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Williams, 375 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)