TINA M. BRADLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1984-12-18
No. 84-209
Per Curiam
460 So. 2d 981 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984) Negative Treatment
Cited by 15 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed judgment for GEICO, holding that the trial court (not arbitrators) must determine uninsured motorist coverage applicability, and that an insured is not entitled to uninsured motorist benefits when she has already recovered benefits from the tortfeasor's liability insurer exceeding the uninsured motorist coverage limit.


Holding

The trial court, not arbitrators, must determine whether uninsured motorist coverage applies, and an insured cannot recover uninsured motorist benefits when she has already recovered benefits from the tortfeasor's liability insurer in excess of the uninsured motorist coverage available.


Headnotes

[1] When an insured has recovered benefits from the tortfeasor's liability insurer in an amount exceeding the uninsured motorist coverage limit, the insured is not entitled t…

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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Bradley sought uninsured motorist coverage under a GEICO policy for injuries sustained in an accident. She had recovered benefits from the insured tor…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final judgment entered in favor of Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) upon a holding that (1) in deciding whether the plaintiff-appellant was entitled to uninsured motorist coverage under the GEICO policy, the trial court, not the arbitrators, was required to determine whether the uninsured motorist policy applied to the case at hand, State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Glass, 421 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), and was empowered to make the threshold factual determination that the uninsured motorist was not solely responsible for the plaintiff’s injuries and that the negligence of the insured motorist contributed to the accident as well, see Travelers Insurance Co. v. Wilson, 371 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 385 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 1980); and (2) because the appellant had available to her, indeed recovered, benefits from the insured tortfeasor’s liability insurer in an amount in excess of the uninsured motorist coverage available under the GEI-CO policy, she is not entitled to uninsured motorist benefits. See Progressive American Insurance Co. v. McKinnie, 460 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Craft v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 432 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 440 So. 2d 351 (Fla.1983); Scharfschwerdt v. Allstate Insurance Co., 430 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Timon, 379 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Behrmann v. Industrial Fire & Casualty Insurance Co., 374 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Travelers Insurance Co. v. Wilson, 371 So. 2d 145.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Coleman v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc., 517 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 1988)
    …ent for that of the trial court on a question of fact. The question of the extent of coverage under the insurance policy in this case is a question of law and is therefore subject to plenary review. See Bradley v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 460 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Gulf Tampa Dry-dock Co. v. Great Atlantic Insurance Co., 757 F. 2d 1172, 1174 (11th Cir.1985) (citing Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 231 So. 2d 193 (Fla.1970)); Drisdom v. Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Co.,…
  • Morrison v. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co., 543 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
    …2d 686 (Fla.1988) (applying the 1981 version of section 627.-727); Bayles v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 483 So. 2d 402 (Fla.1985) (applying the 1983 version of section 627.727); Bradley v. Government Employees Insurance Company, 460 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Wassau Underwriters Insurance Company v. Taubler, 448 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Excess underinsured coverage provided the full limit of U.M. protection in addition to the tortfeasor’s liability coverage for an additional p…
  • Allstate Ins. Co. v. Banaszak, 561 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
    …art of an alleged tortfeasor not a party to the action' constitutes an unarbitrable issue of coverage in an uninsured motorist action is not well defined. However, Allstate properly relies on Cooperstock and Bradley v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 460 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), for the proposition that such an order is inappropriate. In Bradley, the third district held that, in deciding whether the plaintiff-appellant was entitled to uninsured motorist coverage, the court, not the arbitrators, was requi…

Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw