LOUIS H. ASTRIN, APPELLANT,

v.

THE INTERNATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, N.A., APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Castillo, 829 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
  …arly and unambiguously exclude coverage for such losses. We agree. The question of whether a particular risk is covered by an insurance policy is a question of law when the facts are undisputed. See Central Cold Storage, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 452 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). In accordance with well-established rules of interpretation, terms utilized in an insurance policy should be given their plain and unambiguous meaning as understood by the “man-on-the-street.” See State Farm and Cas. Co. v. Metro…
• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ines de Londono, 511 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
  …2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). There was no reason for the question of coverage to be presented to the jury. In the absence of ambiguity, the question was one of law for the trial court’s resolution. See Central Cold Storage, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 452 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 461 So. 2d 115 (Fla.1984). The trial court erred in permitting the jury to pass on this question since State [*606] Farm was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. I would reverse.…
• Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Weiss, 790 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
  …., whether the policy at issue provided coverage for decedent in light of the facts as set out above. The question whether or not a particular policy covers a certain risk is a question of law. See Central Cold Storage, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 452 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). An unambiguous contract of insurance does not require construction, and must be given effect as written. See Perez v. Michigan Mut. Ins. Co., 723 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). The law is well settled that a business auto policy…

Authorities Cited

• Cent. Inv. Assocs., Inc. v. Leasing Serv. Corp., 362 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
• Credit Alliance Corp. v. Westland Mach. Co., Inc., 439 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)