NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT WOODWARD AND SARA WOODWARD, HIS WIFE, 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.
New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company appealed a declaratory judgment requiring its uninsured motorist coverage limits to equal its liability coverage limits. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that Florida's statutory requirement did not apply because the policy was issued to residents of New Jersey for vehicles principally garaged there, and the insurer lacked reasonable notice of the insureds' subsequent relocation to Florida.
The uninsured motorist coverage limits in the policy need not equal the liability coverage limits because: (1) Florida's statutory requirement applies only to policies delivered or issued for delivery in Florida with respect to vehicles registered or principally garaged in Florida, and this policy was issued in New Jersey for New Jersey-garaged vehicles; and (2) the insurer did not have reasonable notice that the insureds had changed their permanent residence to Florida or that the vehicles would be principally garaged there, as the change-of-address form provided no such indication.
[1] A motor vehicle liability insurance policy is not subject to Florida's statutory requirement that uninsured motorist coverage limits must equal liability coverage limits…
[2] A change-of-address notification to the insurer, without further indication of a change in permanent residence or principal garaging of insured vehicles, does not constit…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“The insurance policy herein was therefore not subject to the Florida statutory requirement that the uninsured motorist coverage limits contained therein must equal to the liability coverage limits of the policy, § 627.-727(2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983), because this requirement is applicable only to motor vehicle liability insurance policies "delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state."”
Establishes the territorial limitation of Florida's uninsured motorist coverage requirements
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNew Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company issued a motor vehicle liability insurance policy to Robert and Sara Woodward while they were permanent res…
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 Reasonable Notice cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The final declaratory judgment and the judgment awarding attorney’s fees and costs are reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter a decree in favor of the insurer [New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Co.] declaring that the motor vehicle liability insurance policy herein validly provides for $15,-000/$30,000 uninsured motorist coverage limits, although the liability coverage limits are $50,000/$100,000. We reach this result for two reasons.
First, the subject insurance policy was not delivered or issued for delivery in Florida with respect to any motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in Flori-da. Without dispute, the subject policy was issued and delivered while the insureds [Robert and Sara Woodward] were permanent residents of New Jersey; the policy also, without dispute, related solely to motor vehicles which the insureds principally garaged in New Jersey. The insurance policy herein was therefore not subject to the Florida statutory requirement that the uninsured motorist coverage limits contained therein must equal to the liability coverage limits of the policy, § 627.-727(2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983), because this requirement is applicable only to motor vehicle liability insurance policies “delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state....” § 627.727(1), Fla.Stat. (1983).
Second, we reject the argument that the insurer herein was on reasonable notice that the insureds subsequently changed their permanent residence to Florida and principally garaged the covered motor vehicles in Florida, so as to subject the insurer to the-above-stated Florida statutory requirement based on the authority of Gillen v. United Services Automobile Ass’n, 300 So. 2d 3, 6-7 (Fla.1974).
Prior to the accident in the instant case, the insureds sent the insurer a post office change-of-address form indicating that they had changed their mailing address to a location in Florida. There was no indication on this form that the insureds had changed their permanent residence to Florida or that the covered motor vehicles under the subject policy would now be principally garaged in Flori-da. No other notice was given to the insurer prior to the accident herein indicating the above-stated charges. Unlike Gillen, the insurer herein was therefore not on reasonable notice that the risk of the policy was centered in Florida rather than New Jersey, and, accordingly, Florida law cannot govern as to the extent of uninsured motorist coverage limits contained in the said policy.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Roach, 945 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 2006)…. Accordingly, in applying the exception, courts consider whether the insured notified the insurer of a permanent change of residence and whether the insured risk is or will be primarily located in Florida. See New Jersey Mfrs. Ins. Co. v. Woodward, 456 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (holding that Florida law did not apply to a New Jersey policy because the insurer had notice only of the insured’s changed mailing address, not that the insured changed its permanent address to Florida and principally garaged veh…
-
AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Diamond, 472 So. 2d 1312 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…foreign state and issued to foreign residents. H.S. Equities, Inc. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 334 So. 2d 573 (Fla.1976); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Clendening, 289 So. 2d 704 (Fla.1974); New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Co. v. Woodward, 456 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Amica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Gifford, 434 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Wilson v. Insurance Co. of North America, 415 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Eagle Star Insurance Co. v. Parker, 365 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Alls…
-
Roach v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 892 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…ply when the insurance company does not receive reasonable notice that the risk of the policy is centered in Florida, regardless of Florida’s connection to the insurance coverage. Sturiano, 523 So. 2d at 1129-30; see N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co. v. Woodward, 456 So. 2d 552, 553 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (distinguishing Gillen on the ground that the insureds did not inform the insurance company that their move to Florida was permanent); see also Gordon v. Russell, 561 So. 2d 603, 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (observing that Sturian…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gillen v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 300 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1974)